30 responses to “The Prophet: Abraham among Islam. And Christianity. And Judaism. ##”

1. 

   mosckerr

   July 29, 2025 at 9:58 am

   Human society not flat, nor a טיפש פשט mythology.

    The zionist experiment of democracy faces some criticism by Jews such as myself who favor restoration of a Torah constitutional Republic which mandates a lateral Sanhedrin common law courts to regulate all laws passed by Jerusalem and the state legislatures of the 12 Tribes. Imposing Judicial Legislative Review upon Sanhedrin common law courtrooms with the Mandated Constitutional power to conduct trials which judge Capital Crimes offenses, and impose 4 different types of death penalties, dependent upon the nature of the Capital crimes committed. And equally vital and important דיוק inference to judging Capital Crimes Cases: To judge the leadership responsible for Federal and State governments; based through evidence of laws bureaucratically imposed by government authority officials — viewed through the lenses of prophetic משנה תורה-Legislative Review.
   
   
    The prioritization of lateral common law Sanhedrin courtrooms over institutional machinery of governance, which directly includes government leadership positions within these institutions of government, this essential clause defines, separates, and make unique Jewish political science. Faith: the Torah defines as justice justice pursue; a direct reference to lateral Sanhedrin common law courtrooms having the mandate of ‘Legislative Review’ over all governments – Jerusalem or any tribal/state legislature.
   
   
    Democracy or democratic institutions not part of the Jewish cultural traditions. Democratic mob rule, a Greek idea and not a Jewish cultural concept. Leaders “anointed” under the pre-condition that they will faithfully pursue justice as the rule of law. As in all Human endeavors, the humanity of Man, the ideal and the practical realities – a wide gap separates the two. When a leader sufficiently abuses his leadership mandate a prophet, representative of the Sanhedrin Court, impeaches that leader and replaces him with another. The stories in the Book of Judges and Samuel and Kings, which pits, for example: Shaul against David, serve as precedent models which separate Ordered societies from chaotic societies collapsing into a state of anarchy.
   
   
    Imposition of some grand Cathedral, Soloman Temple – like institutions comparable the newest Federal Reserve building in the US, the graphic porn of pork graft in government that has no shame – within any given civilization. Institutions compare to people that bow down and worship idols. Buildings of wood and stone do not promise efficient good governance. Public expenditure of taxes to build such grand structures of Egoism, they serve witness to a stratification of aristocratic feudal Lord/peasant economic anarchy; which imposes wealth and justifies ‘might make right’ judicial injustice, oppression, theft, and even taboo incest or murder.
   
   
    Contrast the IDF with its direct linkage with power projection through Foreign Policy. Ideally Foreign Policy plays second fiddle to domestic Home Rule. But often the nature of the Humanity of Man, Foreign Policies prioritized over Domestic Policies. This Yatzir Ha’Rah, once more its power seduction dominates the dynamic “ideal vs actual”; this gap separates the vision of governance from the cruel reality – that all men sit and crap on toilets, and it stinks. The Human potential NEVER achieves the Human ideal messiah.
   
   
    NT mythology no different than Homer’s Iliad, and Odyssey. Hesiod’s Theogony and Works and Days. Aeschylus’s The Orestia. Sophocles Oedipus Rus. Euripides Medea etc etc these Greek myth stories, they compare to how Xtians worship their silly sophomoric bible translations which depict a messiah savior that rises from the judicial oppression grave and saves all Humanity — despite the Caesar Son of Gods – the personification of Hercules/JeZeus in flesh, blood & History.
   
   
    The fly in this ever so sweet ointment, myths do not actually make and determine history. As history does not shape and determine modern life today in any society in all the annuls of Humans living on this Earth. Worshipping history as God the exact same idolatry as worshipping Shlomo’s or Herod’s Temples made of wood and stone. Institutionalized buildings, no matter the cost of their construction does not and never has produced the righteous pursuit of judicial common law justice.
   

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. 

   mosckerr

   June 27, 2025 at 3:04 pm

   The Kabbalah of the Siddur and how its serves as the יסוד how to correctly learn the Talmud Yerushalmi and Bavli.

   the Open Siddur Project ✍ פְּרוֺיֶקְט הַסִּדּוּר הַפָּתוּחַ

   Aharon N. Varady (transcription)·opensiddur.org·

   Concluding Prayer for Hallel in the Home Service for the Festival of Passover, by Rabbi J. Leonard Levy (1896) —————————–

   Tefillah does NOT translate to prayer. Tefillah requires שם ומלכות, prayer – as found in saying Tehillem – does not fundamentally require שם ומלכות. What does this mean? מאי נפקא מינא in Aramaic Talmud. Answer: שם ומלכות meaning the dedication of a tohor middah revealed to Moshe at Horev לשמה by means of swearing a Torah oath through which the Avot cut a brit which continually creates from nothing the Chosen Cohen people children of the Avot. Hence: tefillah, as a tohor time-oriented commandment calls upon the God of the Avot in the first blessing. Its interesting the Order of the 13 middot to Moshe at Horev. The Torah does a פרט\כלל – רחום וחנון whereas the later NaCH prophets often order the middot by means of a כלל/פרט – חנון ורחום. Herein explains the order of rabbi Yishmael’s middot.

   Praying Tehillem by stark contrast expressed as a positive commandment which does not require k’vanna. Only tohor time-oriented commandments which dedicate specified tohor middot through swearing a Torah oath, (Tefillah called Amidah b/c a person ideally stands before a Sefer Torah in the beit knesset.), qualify as comparable to the oaths wherein the Avot swore the brit oath by means of a dedicated korban, which continually creates from nothing the chosen Cohen people. Hence the first blessing of the קריא שמע שחרית twice states תמיד מעשה בראשית.

   Because the Book of בראשית introduces the Av mitzva of tohor time-oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar as its k’vanna. Prophetic mussar defines specified tohor middot first revealed to Moshe as the revelation of the Oral Torah at Sinai. Hence when the portion of Israel did their service in the Beit HaMikdash within the Beit Knesset they read the Creation story of the opening Book of בראשית which introduces the Av Torah commandments of tohor time-oriented commandments.

   Consequently if a bnai brit does even minor Torah commandments such as shooing the mother bird off her brood of eggs or even rabbinic commandments like Shemone Esrei or lighting the Hanukkah lights or reading the Book of M’gillat Esther, the B’HaG introduced the chiddush that elevating mitzvot to Av tohor time-oriented commandments raises these rabbinic mitzvot to mitzvot from the Torah!

   The distinction between Tefillah and the tachanun prayer

   the Open Siddur Project ✍ פְּרוֺיֶקְט הַסִּדּוּר הַפָּתוּחַ

   Aharon N. Varady (transcription)·opensiddur.org·

   Concluding Prayer for Hallel in the Home Service for the Festival of Passover, by Rabbi J. Leonard Levy (1896)
   This is a concluding prayer in the Hallel service at the Passover seder by Rabbi J. Leonard Levy to his Haggadah or Home Service for the Festival of Passover (1896) pp. 32-34. The prayer does not appear in subsequent editions. The prayer threads the needle between the particularly Jewish communal focus of Passover and the…

   Moshe Kerr: What separates תפילה from תחנון? A blessing requires שם ומלכות. Shemone Esrei does not contain שם ומלכות. Yet it functions as the definition of a blessing. As does kadesh, which also lacks שם ומלכות. For that matter so does ברכת כהנים וגם כן קריא שמע. The k’vanna of חנון has nothing to do with the formal prayer written in the Siddur. Why? Because all these “mitzvot” qualify as tohor time oriented commandments which require k’vanna. What’s the k’vanna of תחנון through which it defines תפילה?

   Word translations amount to tits on a boar hog when the new born piglets are ravenous and the sow died after giving birth! The 5th middah of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev – חנון, serves as the functioning root שרש of the term תחנון תפילה. The tohor time-oriented commandment of תפילה learns from the additional metaphor of תחנון. Consider the Order of the Shemone Esrei blessings … 3 + 13 + 3 blessings. 6 Yom Tov and 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe, 40 days after the ערב רב Israelites – Jews assimilated and intermarried with Egyptians, no different from the kapo Jewish women who slept with Nazis. This ערב רב, according to the Torah – as expressed in the memory to war against Amalek/antisemitism – they lacked fear of אלהים. This same ערב רב referred to their Golden Calf substitute theology by the name אלהים. This tie-in explains the k’vanna of the term “fear of heaven”.

   The ערב רב Jews lacked “fear of Heaven”, and therefore their avoda zarah profaned the 2nd Sinai commandment. Hence when Jews assimilate and intermarry with Goyim who do not accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai (neither the Xtian Bible nor Muslim Koran ever once brings the שם השם first revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment – the greatest commandment of the entire Torah revelation at Sinai and Horev! Do Jews serve to obey the Torah revelation לשמה או לא לשמה? Observance of all the Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot hangs on this simple question.

   Therefore תפילת תחנון interprets the k’vanna of תפילה, through the concept that a person stands before a Sefer Torah and dedicated specific and defined tohor middot which breath life into the hearts of the Yatrir HaTov of the chosen Cohen oath brit people. The verb תפילה most essentially entails the k’vanna of swearing a Torah oath. What Torah oath? The dedication, think korban, of some specified tohor middot…. Hence the concept of תפילת תחנון.

   Classic Kabbalah spins around interpreting the k’vanna of the Siddur. The Yerushalmi Talmud teaches the mussar that 247 prophets occupied their energy in composing the Shemone Esrei. In the Bavli Talmud Shmuel Ha’Katan added the 19th blessing which cursed the ערב רב Jewish Xtians. The Shemone Esrei in the Yerushalmi obvious came before Shmuel Ha’Katan added this additional blessing. The Shemone Esrei in the Yerushalmi had 427 words. The Order and organization of both the Yerushalmi and Bavli Talmud spins around the Central Axis of the Order of the Shemone Esrei as its central – k’vanna.

   The kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s 4 part logic system hence rejects the 3 part Greek syllogism model of deductive reasoning logic. Inductive reasoning dynamic whereas deductive reasoning static. Newton’s calculus does not compare to ancient Greek Algebra. Hence if a person studies the Talmud this learning serves as the basis to dav-ven the Siddur with k’vanna. The Siddur serves as the basis by which the generations interpret the intent of both the Gemara and the Mishna. The genius of Jewish common law lost on the generations who think that by simply translating common law legal texts and the Siddur into the venacular of foreign languages that they can grasp the k’vanna of Av tohor time-oriented commandments.

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply
   1. 

      mosckerr

      June 30, 2025 at 1:55 pm

      Liberal Kapo Jews. This stinking ערב רב assimilated and intermarried Jews who promote the hatred of Amalek – antisemitism. They simply have no fear of Heaven. The Torah described the original ערב רב that came out of Egypt as אין להם יראת אלהים.

      Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم

      Richard Silverstein·www.richardsilverstein.com

      Trump’s Iran Charade

      In the aftermath of the US attack on Iran’s nuclear plants, a debate rages about the extent of the post Trump’s Iran Charade appeared first on Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم

      The Oct7th War which spread to a war against Lebanon, Syria, and Iran has radically changed the balance of power in the Middle East. The UN has completely discredited its objectivity with the ICC/ICJ attempts to declare Bibi a war-criminal. You drink this blood libel slander like Catholics drink their blood and body of Christ then go out and make a Easter pogrom against Jews based upon some blood libel slander!

      Both England and France have broken off diplomatic relations with Israel, prior to the 12 Day War with Iran! Hence neither power has any influence in the Middle East negotiated peace process ie. the Coming Abraham expanded accords which will most likely see a majority of Arab countries developing diplomatic relations with Israel. If a majority of Arab nations recognize the Jewish state, then and only then will Israel join the Middle East voting block of Nations within the UN. A totally unprecedented reality since Israel won its two Wars of national independence back in 1948 and again in 1967.

      The latter Independence War, recall that Naser swore to throw the Jews into the Sea and correct the Nakba disgrace where 5 Arab Armies failed to throw the Jews into the Sea and complete the Nazi Shoah of the Jewish people! To date, except for Camp David and Abraham Accord Arab nations which currently have diplomatic relations with Israel, post the Israeli victory of 1967, all Arab countries reacted through the Khartoum Conference declaration of 3 No’s. No Peace with Israel. No Recognition of Israel. No Negotiations with Israel.

      Arab countries which reject the Jewish state of Israel refer it as “the Zionist Entity”. General Assembly UN Resolution 3379 declared Zionism is Racism! Apparently your revisionist History over-looked these minor FACTS. All Arab countries absolutely reject the 1917 Balfour Declaration wherein Britain recognized Jewish equal rights to achieve self determination in the Middle East. The League of Nations “Palestine Mandate” awarded to victorious WWI Britain in 1922, based this Mandate upon the Balfour Declaration. Hence b/c Arabs rejected Jewish equal rights to achieve self-determination in the Middle East no Arab would ever refer to himself as a Palestinian.

      Not till 1964, with the State of Israel as a 16 year old country did Egyptian born Yasser Arafat embrace the political opportunism and call his terrorist movement the Palestine Liberation Organization – PLO. That PLO Charter did not condemn Jordanian “occupation” of the Jordan declared “West Bank”. Nor did it condemn the Egyptian “occupation” of Gaza! Only ’48 Israel did the PLO Charter condemn and abhor!!!!

      ---

      A 6 part Mishnaic mussar of this paper. Avodah Zarah in Our Generation: The Crisis of Jews Who Side With Amalek. In every generation, Amalek takes new forms. Today, it is no different. But what is shocking is not only the hatred of our enemies—it is the collaboration of Jews, raised within Torah civilization or its memory, who now partner with those seeking to dismantle the Jewish state.

      When Jewish voices shout “From the River to the Sea,” they are not engaged in protest—they are echoing the genocidal goals of Hamas. When they equate Israel’s defense against a massacre to genocide, they join in blood libel, no different in kind from the medieval slanders that triggered Easter pogroms. When they ally with UN declarations and ICC/ICJ indictments meant to strip Jews of the right to self-defense, they violate the first commandment of Jewish history: “Never again shall Jewish blood be cheap.”

      1. Sovereignty vs. Subjugation: Jews Ruling vs. Jews Ruled: A fundamental distinction separates Jews living as a sovereign nation in their own land versus Jews existing as a minority under non-Jewish rule (galut). Assimilated & intermarried Jews in the West, who function within dominant non-Jewish cultures, have lost connection with Jewish national identity and Torah sovereignty, resembling the biblical Erev Rav—those lacking fear of Heaven and loyalty to the Jewish nation.

      2. Double Standards in Territorial Legitimacy: Prussia vs. Samaria & Gaza: The hypocrisy of the international community – emphasized. While the post-WWII redrawing of European borders—such as Poland and Russia’s annexation of Prussia—is accepted without condemnation, Israel is uniquely targeted for reasserting sovereignty over Samaria and Gaza after 1967. UN Resolutions 242 and 338 are cited as politically biased tools used to delegitimize Israel’s historical and military rights.

      3. Western Imperialism and Regional Domination: Suez to Iran. The 1956 Suez Crisis serves as evidence of continued British and French imperial ambitions, cloaked in Cold War geopolitics and economic control (specifically over the Suez Canal). This is paralleled with U.S./British involvement in Iran—removing Mossadegh and reinstalling the Shah to prevent the nationalization of oil. The 1979 Iranian Revolution is framed as a reaction to this imperialism. Similarly, prior to the “12 Day War,” the UK and France withdrew diplomatic ties with Israel in protest of their exclusion from influencing a ceasefire in Gaza.

      4. Rejection of the 242/338 Two-State Paradigm by the Abraham Accords. The Abraham Accords are seen as a major geopolitical shift, fundamentally rejecting the British- and French-backed vision of peace based on dividing Israel into two hostile entities—akin to India-Pakistan or North-South Korea. The Accords envision peace without territorial partition, and with increasing normalization between Israel and Arab states, signal the failure of the old colonial-era frameworks.

      5. UN Bias and Historical Arab Rejectionism of the Balfour Declaration wherein a major Great Power recognized Jewish equal rights to achieve self-determination in the Middle East. The UN based its 1922 Palestinian Mandate upon the Balfour Treaty. The Khartoum Conference (1967) “Three No’s” serves as proof of Arab states’ refusal to accept Israel’s equal rights to self-determination. The UN, particularly via General Assembly Resolution 3379 (“Zionism is racism”), has been complicit in reinforcing this Arab rejectionism of Jewish equal rights to achieve self-determination. Meanwhile, the ICC and ICJ today continue the Zionism is Racism pattern, under the guise of international law, falsely accusing Israeli leaders of war crimes while ignoring the Oct7th pogrom and declaring the current conflict pre-dates Oct7th. This whitewashes the Oct7th surprise attack, comparable to the Pearl Harbor attack on Dec7th 1941.

      6. The Manufactured Identity of “Palestinians” and PLO Opportunism. The identity of “Palestinians”, a modern invention, emerging only in 1964 with the formation of the PLO under Egyptian-born Yasser Arafat. The original PLO Charter made no objection to Jordanian control of the West Bank or Egyptian rule in Gaza, focusing only on dismantling Israel. This opportunistic narrative is framed as a political weapon rather than a legitimate national movement.

      ---

      The Talmud (Yoma 9b) states:

      מקדש שני שהיו עוסקים בתורה ובמצות וגמילות חסדים, מפני מה חרב? מפני שהיתה בו שנאת חנם. Then, the Midrash in Eikha Rabbah and various aggadot go further to compare sinat chinam with the worst transgressions—including idolatry, sexual immorality, and murder—suggesting that internal Jewish hatred is as destructive as idol worship.

      G’lut Jews have lost the wisdom to keep and obey the Torah לשמה. Assimilated and intermarried Jews living under foreign alien cultures and customs have abandoned the T’NaCH, Talmud, Midrashim, and Siddur as the foundation which shapes and forms all Torah cultures and customs. As an ערב רב they cling to alien cultures and customs by which they form and shape their identities and values. These foreign cultures and customs which they embrace have become the Gods which they worship.

      מידה כנגד מידה a core Torah principle, and that slogans like “From the river to the sea”—when chanted by Jews—do immense damage. Jews who equate the Gaza war with the Shoah genocide equals to the abhorrence to blood libel slanders which produced annual pogroms prior to Easter across Europe. Liberal Jews disgraceful alliance with South African declarations of genocide in Gaza and Apartheid a flat out public chilul Hashem. Such Jews have no portion in the world to Come. These Jews have broken faith with the brit Cohen people, just like as did the Erev Rav which aroused Amalek antisemites throughout the generations. The blood of hundreds of generations of Jews slaughtered cries out and denounces these stinking ערב רב Jews.

      When Jews chant “From the River to the Sea,” they are not merely protesting policy—they are aligning themselves with those who dream of Israel’s destruction. This is not political dissent. It is covenantal treason. Like the Erev Rav, they emerge at times of national crisis to confuse the people, distort Torah, and drain morale. Their slogans, shouted from exile and college campuses, do more than harm Israel’s name abroad—they erode our internal unity and desecrate the mission entrusted to Israel at Sinai. These Jews have not merely lost political direction—they have forfeited spiritual clarity. They replace Torah with the gods of globalism, intersectionality, and postmodern guilt. The Torah calls this avodah zarah—not in metaphor, but in law.

      The Torah commands the total destruction of Amalek—without mercy, without compromise. This commandment appears in multiple places. Devarim 25:17–19: “You shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven. Do not forget.”

      Shemot 17:16: “Hashem will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.”

      Shmuel I 15: Shmuel commands Shaul to annihilate Amalek totally, down to every man, woman, child, and animal. When Shaul shows mercy, he is rejected as king.

      This is a Torah commandment targets Amalek’s existential war against Hashem and against the Jewish people. Amalek is not simply an enemy—it is a theological and civilizational antithesis to Torah, a force of evil that seeks to destroy the very brit between Hashem and Israel.

      The statute law perversion of Hilchot Melachim 5:5 flat out wrong. The 7 laws of bnai noach apply strictly and only to gere toshav temporary residents living within the borders of Judea. Once those Goyim returned to their homelands the 7 laws no longer applied to them. The purpose of keeping those 7 laws: Unlike the refugee Na’Cree stranger who had no judicial rights to fair compensation of damages inflicted. Gere Toshav enjoyed the legal right to sue an Israel for damages and receive fair compensation. Not so the Canaani refugees. An Israel had no legal obligation to compensate them for damages they suffered from an Israel. The purpose of judicial justice – to restore Trust between bnai brit who inflict damages upon one another. The NaCree Canaani refugees never ever trusted during their entire temporary residence within the borders of Judea.

      Today we can easily identify Amalek with absolute certainty because assimilation and intermarriage defines avoda zarah and Amalek promotes the worship of avoda zarah. The RambaN’s (Devarim 25) commentary applies today because the Torah defines faith as the pursuit of righteous judicial justice within the borders of the Constitutional 12 Tribe Republic. Sanhedrin 98a: “Moshiach ben David will not come until all judges are restored as of old.” Amalek is not a foreign invader, but a spiritual-political corruption that arises from within, where Torah is abandoned, brit is dissolved, and Jewish trust is betrayed. The king David model dedicates the mitzva of Moshiach upon justice based upon the פרט of the lack of justice served to the baal of Bat Sheva.

      The ערב רב who left Egypt – Jews. Amalek attacked these Jews wherein they embraced the ways of Amalek ie assimilation and intermarriage. Amalek by definition: a nation that attacked Israel at its weakest from behind. From behind refers to Jews who have no fear of God.

      Sinat chinam and betrayal while similar to precedent cases of mumar, tinok she’nishba, moser, and min, clearly the added blessing within the Shemone Esrei by Shmuel Ha’Katan condemns this ערב רב Amalek internal Jewish abomination no different than the Ben Sorer u’Moreh.

      The term “Amalek”, applied to Jews perceived as betraying their people, rather than to alien Goyim people/strangers. This internal betrayal – viewed as particularly egregious because it comes from within the community, undermining the collective identity and mission of the Jewish people. The comparison to figures like Benedict Arnold highlights the seriousness of perceived betrayal during critical moments in Jewish history, such as the fight for independence and survival against external threats. Liberal Reform Jewish movements or individuals, who align themselves with foreign enemies who oppose Israel or Jewish sovereignty, their tuma actions constitute as most base betrayal, meaning Amalek.

      Liberal Reform Judaisim theology and Jewish political groups or individuals who embrace this Av tuma avoda zarah; who align themselves with anti-Israel sentiments or actions contribute to a form of betrayal which defines the Torah commandment to obliterate Amalek. The seriousness of internal divisions within the Jewish community and the implications of those divisions for Jewish identity and solidarity herein defines the k’vanna of remembering the Torah obligation to utterly obliterate Amalek without showing the slightest regard for mercy.

      LikeLike

      Reply
   2. 

      mosckerr

      July 7, 2025 at 8:56 pm

      While studying Soviet foreign policy under Prof. Dunning at Texas A&M, I developed a theory of Trotsky’s “Permanent Revolution” as a mechanism for dismantling the ethical containment force of a civilization. This theory helped explain why Stalin, in 1939, invited Hitler to attack the USSR, enabling the Nazi military to mass troops along Soviet borders without triggering a Soviet mobilization. Stalin, fearing the precedent of WWI—where a prolonged war catalyzed the collapse of the Czarist regime—believed such a shock invasion could be politically survivable if it avoided prolonged internal dissent.

      The Bolsheviks based their theory of revolution upon the French revolution where the King and the Church destroyed. The Bolsheviks destroyed both the Czar and the Greek Orthodox Church. The collapse of the Shah of Iran witnessed the overthrow of both the Shah and Western culture. Hitler did the same in Germany, he destroyed the post WWI Parliament and the Church.

      Vladimir Lenin’s approach to revolution built around a tight knit and concealed cabal of revolutionaries. This idea separated from the Menshevik theories which embraced anarchist theories of revolution. Lenin rejected the anarchist and decentralist leanings of the Mensheviks, establishing a covert revolutionary elite to seize power. Trotsky, by contrast, remained more loyal to the original soviet model: workers’ councils governing through direct delegation. Lenin Marxist ideology emphasized the role of the proletariat in overthrowing capitalism and establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat. Whereas Troskii, being at heart a Menshevik supported “All Power to the Soviets” way to achieve political power and rule of government – at least till he sat as the Head of State. Lenin and Troskii used specific strategies, such as forming alliances with other revolutionary groups and leveraging the discontent of soldiers and workers, to successfully overthrow the Provisional Government. Stalin would employ intra-Bolshevik alliances to expel Troskii as the heir of Lenin.

      The simplistic narrative of the Gospels – a story of Santa Claus coming to town lies told to children. Religious belief systems, no different than Stalin’s and Hitler’s propaganda lies told to their Party “believers”. The church persecution of “Xtian heretics” — no different than Stalin’s show trials of Bolshevik leaders whose opinions threatened the stability of Stalin’s One Man dictatorship.

      Or Hitler’s, the “Night of the Long Knives,” purge which executed several leaders of the Sturmabteilung (SA), also known as the Brown Shirts, as well as other political adversaries. The SA, led by Ernst Röhm, instrumental in Hitler’s rise to power, but by 1934, their increasing power and Röhm’s ambitions posed a threat to Hitler and the more conservative elements of the Nazi Party, including the military (Reichswehr) and the SS (Schutzstaffel).

      Hitler used a purge to consolidate his power, eliminate rivals, and gain the support of the military, which viewed the SA as a potential threat. The event resulted in the deaths of many SA leaders and other political opponents, solidifying Hitler’s control over the Nazi Party and the German state. The Night of the Long Knives, often seen as a turning point in the establishment of Hitler’s dictatorship.

      During the Middle Ages the Pope instituted similar purges of all heretic gnostic and Protestant believers which challenged the dominance of the church monopoly over how to understand and interpret the NT\gospels. For example all church leaders have denounced to this very day the revelation of the Oral Torah as explained through the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s four part פרדס logic format.

      Peter Lombard (c. 1100-1160), a significant figure in medieval theology, best known for his work “Sentences” (Sententiae), which became a cornerstone of Scholastic thought. His “Sentences” – a compilation of theological opinions and teachings from earlier Church Fathers and theologians, structured in a way that facilitated debate and discussion among scholars. The “Sentences” addressed various topics, including the nature of God, the sacraments, and the virtues. It provided a systematic approach to theology that encouraged critical thinking and analysis.

      Gratian, who lived around 1140, a prominent medieval scholar and jurist, best known for his work in canon law. He often referred to by many catholics as the “Father of Canon Law”, due to his significant contributions to the development of ecclesiastical legal systems in the Catholic church. His most notable work – the “Decretum Gratiani.” A comprehensive compilation of canon law that organized and harmonized the various legal texts and decrees which accumulated over the years. This work, pivotal in establishing a systematic approach to canon law and served as a foundational text for later legal scholars and the development of church law.

      Gratian’s “Decretum” addressed various topics, including the authority of the church, the nature of sin, and the administration of sacraments. Gratian’s ‘Decretum’ shaped the Church’s legal framework and remained a foundational text in canon law and theology for centuries. His work laid the groundwork for subsequent developments in both canon law and civil law.

      Saint Albert the Great, another significant figure in the development of medieval philosophy and science. Albertus Magnus, a mentor to Thomas Aquinas at the University of Paris. His influence on Aquinas helped shape the latter’s integration of Aristotelian philosophy with Xtian theology. He played a crucial role in reintroducing Aristotelian philosophy to the Xtian intellectual tradition.

      Albertus sought to reconcile Aristotle’s ideas with Xtian doctrine, emphasizing the compatibility of faith and reason. Often regarded as one of the first to systematically study the natural world. His integration of Aristotelian philosophy with Xtian theology influenced not only his students, like Aquinas, but also the broader development of Western philosophy and science. His work in biology, mineralogy, and metaphysics, all of which were deeply empirical for the time viewed as a bridge between the ancient philosophy and the rediscovered ancient Greek logic philosophies in the 10th Century.

      Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274): Perhaps the most famous Scholastic philosopher and theologian, Aquinas – best known for his works “Summa Theologica” and “Summa Contra Gentiles.” He sought to reconcile faith and reason, drawing heavily on Aristotelian philosophy.

      This is Aquinas’s most famous work, structured as a comprehensive guide to theology. It addresses various theological questions, including the existence of God, the nature of man, and moral principles. The work is notable for its systematic approach and use of Aristotelian logic.

      Summa Contra Gentiles, Aquinas defends the Xtian faith against non-Xtian philosophies, particularly those of Islam and Judaism. It emphasizes the rational basis of faith and aims to demonstrate the compatibility of reason and revelation. Its failure to address the 4 part inductive reasoning logic of Oral Torah ultimately proves the propaganda half truths of church theology.

      Aquinas, by stark contrast drew heavily on the works of Aristotle rather than rabbi Akiva. The latter views the Talmud compared to the warp/weft threads of a loom. Where דרוש ופשט interpret T’NaCH prophetic mussar and interpret the kvanna of Aggadic stories. While רמז וסוד conceal as the foundation of time oriented commandments express through both Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot. Aquinas consciously chose and integrated Aristotelian philosophy within the fabric of Xtian doctrine. He introduced concepts such as the “Five Ways” to demonstrate the existence of God, arguments based on observation and reason based upon Greek philosophy. And the Xtian Muslim dogma of Universal monotheism.

      Aristotle’s static logic, ideal for constructing bridges. Hence Aquinas prioritized ancient Greek logic as ideal to support catholic dogmatism and Papal Bulls. Fluid\dynamic inductive reasoning/law where opposing prosecutor and defense lawyers rely exclusively upon previous judicial precedents to support pro & con opinions, hardly served the interests of a Vatican bible dictatorship. All three—Church, Stalin, Hitler—feared epistemological rivals: alternative systems of truth and authority. Like Stalinist “confessions” under torture, medieval inquisitions produced fabricated heresies to maintain a monopoly over “truth.”

      Aquinas, known for his development of the concept of ancient Greek ‘natural law’. Which posits that moral principles best understood through human reason and inherent in the nature of human beings. His method involved posing Socratic-Plato questions, presenting objections, and then providing answers, which became a hallmark of Scholastic methodology.

      Suppression of heretical beliefs and movements that challenged Vatican authority and interpretation of Xtian substitute theology doctrine included church denial of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev. Rabbi Akiva’s 4 part inductive logic system “replaced” by Aristotle’s 3 part syllogism of deductive logic. The latter shaped the church narrative. Logos (Greek abstraction) vs. Dibur or Torah SheB’al Peh (Oath alliance active remembrance of the oaths sworn by Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov.), which the church fathers violently denounce. In 1242 the Pope ordered the public burning of all Talmudic manuscripts within the whole of France.

      The church defined heresy as beliefs or practices that deviated from established doctrine dogma and Vatican Bulls. Groups such as the Cathars and Waldensians, and of course Jews, labeled as cursed heretics for their stubborn stiff-necked alternative interpretations of Xtianity; Jews who viewed the NT as a Roman fraud, utterly despised by being impoverished through taxation without representation and thrown into ghetto gulags for multiple Centuries – פרדס inductive reasoning, compares to mentioning aloud the name of Lord Voldemort.

      Established in the 12th century, the Inquisition formalized systematic oppression into a Nazi-like system – wherein the catholic thought police identified, prosecuted and slaughtered “heretics”. It involved pre-decided judicial investigations, trials, employed to conceal satanic human torture. The most infamous of these the notorious war-crimes: Spanish Inquisition. Begun in 1478, targeting Jews, Muslims, and Protestant reformers.

      Suppression of heretical beliefs and movements that challenged Vatican authority and interpretation of Xtian doctrine, specifically included church denial of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev. Which also laid the foundation for Stalin’s later show trials in the 1930s.

      Rabbi Akiva’s 4 part inductive logic system, Xtian replacement theology” prioritized and emphasized both Paul’s ‘original sin’ theology and later Aristotle’s 3 part syllogism of deductive logic, and denounced Jewish Oral Torah as non existent. This proverbial ostrich burying head in sand cowardice, such tuma pusillanimity shapes the church narratives to this very day.

      The church classically defined heresy, prior to the French Revolution, as beliefs or practices that deviated and challenged the church dictate. Groups such as the Cathars and Waldensians, labeled as heretics for their alternative interpretations of both bible & Xtianity. Many groups other than these specific particulars utterly rejected the church Vatican monopoly – authority and power – to solely interpret the intent of both bible and church dogma. The Inquisition prosecution of heretics involved quasi-investigations, trials, and often torture punishments, resulting in execution.

      The Gospel of John, written in Greek. The earliest known manuscripts of the Gospel of john include fragments such as the Rylands Library Papyrus P52, which dates to around 125 CE. This fragment, the oldest known manuscript of any part of the New Testament and contains a few verses from John 18. Other significant manuscripts, like Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, date from the 4th century CE and include the entire text of the Gospel.

      The early Church Fathers, who were primarily Greek and Latin speakers, recognized the Greek text as the authoritative version. They often cited it in their writings, which supports the Rylands Library Papyrus P52, and contributes to the perception that the john gospel was originally composed in Greek. During this period of the Roman empire Greek served as the lingua franca – the medium of communication between peoples of different languages.

      The Hellenistic themes of pre-existent divinity and hypostatic union present significant theological challenges when compared to the foundational principles of revelation as outlined in the Torah, particularly the events at Sinai. Pre-Existent Divinity, this concept suggests that certain divine beings or aspects of divinity existed before the creation of the world. In Hellenistic thought, this often refers to the idea of a divine Logos or intermediary that existed alongside God before the creation of the universe. In Xtian theology, this Greek concept, reflected in the belief in the pre-existence of Christ, seen as the divine Word (Logos) that was with God and was God (John 1:1).

      While some early Church Fathers, like Papias, mentioned a possible ‘Hebrew Gospel’, they did not specifically attribute this to john. The notion of a Hebrew Gospel has been discussed in the context of the early Christian community’s use of different languages and texts. However, there no manuscript exists that definitively supports this revisionist history narrative. Most of the early references to such texts, compare to church blood libel slanders – indirect and often speculative. The lack of concrete manuscript evidence has led many scholars to view the idea of a Hebrew Gospel of John as most base revisionist history. The Greek Gospel of John, with no reliable Hebrew precedent, confirms the Roman-Hellenistic theological trajectory—not an indigenous Semitic prophecy.

      The absence of a Hebrew manuscript or even substantial references to it in early Christian writings further proves this as just another blood libel lie. The theological themes in the Gospel of John, such as the Logos (Word) and the divinity of Christ, align more closely with Hellenistic thought than Hebrew thought which totally repudiate it. Attempts by Xtians in this Century to declare that Logos means “ben” or “JeZeus” amounts to creating their own ‘Oral Torah way’ to interpret the NT, while denying the existence of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev.

      The church’s persecution of heresy did not merely target political dissent—it waged wars against competing systems of legal and judicial reasoning vs. legislative statute law dictates made by tyrants or non elected bureaucrats. The Jewish Oral Torah, whose revelatory authority at Horev, rooted in inductive logic and oaths precedent active remembrance of the Avot; this judicial common law fundamentally threatened the Vatican’s imposed monopoly over its Pravda – truth. Replacing Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס framework with Aristotle’s deductive syllogism, the Church attempted to implode T’NaCH and Talmudic common law judicial legalism. That actively shapes and influences the cultures and customs which defines Jewish identity as a people of the chosen Cohen nation.

      The battle over heresy, never merely about doctrine—rather, a battle over interpretive sovereignty. The church’s erasure of the Oral Torah, its violent rejection of the פרדס legal judicial legislative review, and its dogmatic substitution of Greek metaphysics, all point to a broader imperial strategy: the silencing of Sinai. Just as Stalin erased rivals and Hitler purged the SA, the Vatican constructed a theological police state—burning the Talmud, ghettoizing Jews, and replacing the oath alliance conscious remembrance of the Avot through the tefillah from the Torah kre’a shma, the church intentionally sought to implode Horev replaced by the empire of Rome. That war on revelation still echoes in every attempt to retranslate the Gospel into Hebrew, to resurrect ‘Logos’ as ‘Ben,’ and to pass fiction as prophecy.”

      The Torah commandment to uproot Canaanite cultures reflects not cruelty but covenantal mercy (מידת רחום)—a national immunization against cultural apostasy and idolatry. The second commandment warns against assimilating into societies that reject the Horev revelation, whether ancient Canaanites or modern ideological empires like Rome and Mecca. Failure to uproot the ancient Canaanites directly threatened the 2nd Sinai commandment not to follow the cultures and customs of peoples who reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and Horev. The peoples of both Xtianity and Islam reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and Horev. Hence the church sought to implode and cause the People of Israel to forget the Oral Torah just as did the assimilated Tzeddukim who sought to transform Jerusalem into a Greek polis.

      LikeLike

      Reply
3. 

   mosckerr

   June 24, 2025 at 11:56 am

   The 12 Day War has ended. The Tripartite Alliance US – India – Israel now dominates. The leadership of Bibi where he held back following the Oct 7th Abomination, where he did not commit the IDF into Gaza but waited for other Arab countries to join the War as did Lebanon and Syria and the Houthis. Thank you for your great leadership Bibi.

   The losers of this Middle East War … England and France broke off diplomatic relations with Israel over the Gaza war. The UN attempted to arrest the PM as a war-criminal. The UN, EU and Britain have zero say in shaping the post war ‘balance of power’ in the Middle East. Revenge for the UNSC 242 & 338 imperialist Resolutions! In this war the Quartet Powers exist comparable to tits on a boar hog. Another BIG LOSER of this the 12 Day War —- China. Post War, a massive expansion of the Abraham Accords.

   Iran Admits Defeat: Khamenei just lost the 12 day war
   🚨 BREAKING: China THREATENS Iran As Trump Confirms Ceasefire
   INDIA & ISRAEL’s Secret Plan to Reclaim POK — Mell Robbins Motivational Speaker. – YouTube
   🚨 BREAKING: Israel OPENS Iran Prison’s Gate As Pahlavi Announces Transition Government – YouTube

   Before the US bombed Iranian nuclear facilities, Trump pulled out of the G-7 meeting and said the Macron did not know squat about the conflict in the Middle East.
   Trump blasts Macron, says early G7 exit has ‘nothing to do’ with an Israel-Iran ceasefire

   The collapse of post-WWII multilateral diplomacy in the Middle East. The rise of a multipolar alliance system where nations like India and Israel take the place once held by Britain and France. The exposure of Arab regimes who tacitly supported Hamas or Hezbollah and their strategic miscalculations. The irrelevance of Cold War-era frameworks, both legal and political, to the current reality. The Middle East’s future will no longer be decided in Geneva or Brussels, but in Jerusalem, Washington, and New Delhi…The irrelevance of Cold War-era frameworks, both legal and political, to the current reality.
   Iran: Who was Ayatollah Khomeini? | If You’re Listening

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. 

   mosckerr

   June 22, 2025 at 6:25 pm

   Thank YOU Mr. President. Iran looks more and more like Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria, and the Houthis. Burn baby burn.

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. 

   mosckerr

   April 14, 2025 at 8:02 pm

   Another example of Gospel revisionist history which substitute the gospel for the T’NaCH narrative as primary: Luke 19:41-42

   The noun peace does not correctly translate the verb shalom. Shalom stands upon the foundation of trust. Peace reflects ancient Greek philosophical rhetoric; where undefined key terms which require the listeners fuzzy logic to define – these essential undefined terms – like shalom, upon which all later ideas thereafter hang upon.

   Herein defines the classic use of Greek rhetoric by which a person controls and directs the masses. The City of David represents the rule of fair and righteous Judicial common law justice. It has absolutely nothing what so ever to do with the revisionist history of the imaginary physical history of Jesus the imaginary myth Son of God – man.

   “Shalom” carries far more than the modern Western notion of “peace.” In Hebrew, shalom implies completeness, wholeness, harmony, security, and a just, equitable social order rooted in mutual trust; deeply tied to emunah (faith/trust) and mishpat (justice).

   By contrast, the Greek eirēnē—translated into English as “peace”—more passive, & static, whereas shalom utterly dynamic. And when the Gospel of Luke (originally written in Greek) uses eirēnē, translators historically rendered it as “peace” in English, which utterly obscures the Hebrew mindset behind Jesus’ (the Son of God character’s) lament over Jerusalem.

   Greek rhetoric originally employed as a tool for crowd control. Rhetoric sophistry, and later Stoicism or Platonism, deeply shaped and influenced early Christian theology. These systems often pivot on undefined abstractions—”Logos”, “Peace”, “Salvation”, etc.—easily manipulated by rhetoric design, without grounding in lived experience or legal precedent (as Hebrew law absolutely demands).

   Revisionist history and the mythologizing of Son of God Jesus. This aligns with the view that the Gospels understood as a allegorical political theology, where the imaginary mythical character of Son of God “Jesus” represents, not a literal historical figure but a narrative device or archetype for deeper sociopolitical critique—especially of Roman occupation and corrupt legal systems.

   So if we read Luke 19:42 not as a personal lament by a mythological Son of God Jesus, but rather as a legal or prophetic indictment of Jerusalem’s Torah leadership and their collective failure to uphold mishpat (justice) and trust-based shalom, the entire tone and meaning of the text radically shifts, the Torah becomes demoted in priority – cast under the shadow of the Son of God narrative.

   Torah, in point of fact, and not the gospel rhetoric narrative, less about emotion and more about the oath brit alliance, the prophetic mussar which rebukes the leaders of the chosen Cohen nation for their failure, sworn at Sinai, their conscious corruption which pursues opportunistic political power over the righteousness of enforced judicial justice.

   Shalom functions as a legal-communal framework, rather than merely a trick of rhetoric where mood or emotion dominates the direction taken by the blind mob masses. It reflects a system of relationships rooted in fidelity to the oath brit alliance and reciprocal trust (emunah). In that sense, shalom simply not something felt, but something upheld—a real social order built on mishpat (justice) and righteousness (tzedek), as found in the Torah and enforced by judges (shofetim) and prophets (nevi’im).

   When shalom becomes translated into Greek as eirēnē, the foundational juridical content gets lost in abstraction. Eirēnē leans more toward inner tranquility or absence of conflict—passive, internal, de-prioritized obligations to pursue fair compensation to those who suffer damages. Peace reflects a word that fits into a philosophical or imperial religious context, not a oath brit alliance by and through which the Torah defines the term brit; a Sinai commitment לשמה.

   Greek thought, expressed in the new testament purposely neutralizes\whitewashes the legal and relational substance of Hebrew term Shalom, by absorbing Shalom into idealized peace categories. This Greek rhetoric technique then detached the gospels from historical accountability.

   Greek rhetorical systems—especially sophistry and later Platonic-Christian syntheses—weaponized undefined key term peace. Love, for example: later the church authorities turned to Greek agape as its definition. Such critical abstractions create semantic fog, where critical abstract terms, their most essential intent meanings, they float above the replaced Hebrew verbs with meaningless noun names. The Torah defines the verb love as “ownership”. A man does not love that which he does not own. Hence the mitzva of kiddushin requires that the man acquires the Nefesh O’lam Ha’bah soul of his wife – meaning the children produced through this oath alliance brit union.

   Whereas the writers of gospel and new testament narratives, those in power who chose to supplant the TNaCH with their New Testament/Old Testament religious rhetoric, like as did Muhammad’s koran replaced the new testament and the Book of Mormon replacement holy book of Mormon equally deprioritized the T’NaCH and new testament and koran forgeries.

   These replacement holy books seized power, they edit and control the new moral gospel narrative through subtle re-defined definitions. “Salvation,” “grace,” “faith,” Yishmael replaced Yitzak at the Akadah, and even “God” become perverted into malleable terms. Monotheism rapes the 2nd Sinai commandment. Rather than precise sworn oaths which define intent of Judicial common law. The sworn oaths got totally whitewashed from the original T’NaCH prophetic mussar. Swept away in the new creed theologies which define how Man must believe in these New Gods dolled up as the T’NaCH God of Sinai.

   This Greek rhetorical shift, makes room for imperial theology, where obedience to Rome’s version of peace (Pax Romana) wolf in sheep clothing, rebranded as the kosher spiritual obedience, and where Jerusalem’s failure totally ignores judicial justice in the oath sworn Cohen lands of inheritance replaced by theological belief systems in the messiah or strict monotheism.

   This new testament justification for Jerusalem’s destruction consequent to the Jewish revolt in 66CE totally and completely ignores the prophetic mussar of the NaCH which warned of the destruction and exile of both Israel & Judah by the g’lut exile carried out through the Divine agents of both the Assyrian and Babylonian empires within the mussar of the T’NaCH itself.

   Return the Gospel narrative to its roots of Hebrew common law jurisprudence, strip away the Greco-Roman mythologizing that turned the gospel narrative into its own separate religion, into an abstract religion of personal piety and internal peace. This new testament socio-legal drama, with its son of God figure lamenting the collapse of Jerusalem over its failure to recognize the Son of God true messiah. Greek replacements—eirēnē, pistis, charis, logos—introduce semantic drift. That drift allows imperial theology to abstract away historical responsibility, essentially laundering injustice through feel-good metaphysics.

   The Case Luke 19:42 nstead of a legal rebuke grounded in prophetic precedent (like those of Yirmiyahu or Yeshayahu), it’s reframed as a personal emotional lament by a deified character, whose authority derives from myth rather than brit law. It bypasses the system of shofetim and nevi’im who were accountable to the Torah and for the community.

   The gospel narrative replaces the oath sworn dedication to pursue justice within the borders of the chosen Cohen oath brit lands, replaced by a foreign idea of a passive messiah who brings peace to the Goyim people incorporated as part of the chosen Cohen people. This narrative totally ignores the teshuva made by HaShem where on Yom Kippur HaShem annulled the vow to make of Moshe’s seed the chosen Cohen people. This Divine t’shuva utterly rejects the later replacement theologies and holy books witch violate the commandment — do not add or subtract from this Torah.

   According to prophetic mussar, neither Babylon nor Rome destroyed Jerusalem. The failure of the chosen oath alliance brit, directly comparable to the sin of the Golden Calf, where the chosen Cohen people fail to obey the terms of the Sinai oath alliance. Herein defines the basis for the destruction of Jerusalem and the g’lut exile of the Jewish people by the Assyrian, Babylonian and Roman empires. And before these g’lut exiles the Egyptian exile, the cruel oppression of Israelite slaves – caused by the betrayal and sale of Yosef by his jealous brothers.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   1. 

      mosckerr

      April 28, 2025 at 1:26 pm

      Why does the UN continue the Catholic and Protestant Church Middle Ages clap-trap which dictated and monopolized who can read and how readers can interpret the Bible?

      A question about Gaza: If these Arab refugees – according to UNWRA – how can Europe and Obama equate Israel and Palestine as equal States? Buggery and whoredom parade in church robes — the UN’s anti-Israel saints revealed as Nazi whores at the altar.

      1. Impact on Palestinians lives – a non starter b/c Palestinian refugees have no more rights than did Jewish refugees in ghetto gulags. Palestinian suffering, a weaponized inheritance through UNWRA, while Jewish post WWII refugee suffering utterly erased. 2. Two-State Solution viability only valid if 242 and 2334 valid Resolutions. You have not shown how either qualify as valid UN Resolutions. Since both exist as Chapter VI and not Chapter VII, neither qualify as international law. In fact both compare to the invalid 3379 Resolution; both qualify as revisionist history which pretends to turn the clock back where Arabs accept and embrace UN 181. 3. Role of International Aid. A strong point, such “aid” by UNWRA compares to the British opium trade forced upon China during the 19th Century. 4. International Law and Norms: The UN Chapter VI Resolutions does not write nor enforces “international law”. Only treaties signed by Independent States forge international law. A Chapter VII Resolution which demanded North Korea withdraw back to the 38th parallel – herein constitutes “international law”.

      The US, especially under President Trump, but even under President Biden, an ally of the Jewish state! UN Resolution 3379, for example has nothing to do with the failure of the UN to force the Arab voting blocks to recognize Israel as a member-State of the Middle East – not an Apartheid policy?

      Only Israel treated in this manner. UN Human Rights Council Resolution 7/1, often referred to as item #7, addresses the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, specifically focusing on Israel’s actions. This resolution mandates that the UN Human Rights Council conduct an annual investigation into Israeli violations of human rights in these territories. Only Israel targeted in this disproportionate manner. That’s not Apartheid at the UN?

      Have introduced two examples of “Nazi like” behavior. In 2018, under President Trump, the U.S. announced its withdrawal from the UNHRC, citing concerns about the council’s effectiveness and its alleged bias. The U.S. government has also called for reforms within the council to improve its credibility and effectiveness in addressing human rights issues globally. Nations that hold no diplomatic relations with Israel should not have the UN Right to publicly condemn Israel. Not in the Human Rights Council nor in the UN General Assembly.

      This makes the US completely relevant to the strong emotional objection: “enough of this Nazi like propaganda”. The issue of recognition of Israel by Arab nations and the dynamics of voting blocs in the United Nations and other international forums … The U.S. has historically supported Israel and has encouraged Arab nations to normalize relations with it.

      Arab nations have often cited Resolution 242 as a basis for their refusal to recognize Israel, arguing that it requires Israel to withdraw from all occupied territories, including the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, as a prerequisite for peace. Britain and France, the main architects behind the writing of the Chapter VI language of UN Resolution 242. Only Chapter VII UN Resolutions qualify as “international law”. Propaganda blurs Chapter VI suggestions (comparable to a bill presented unto Congress) with Chapter VII laws passed by Congress. Therefore this EU Voting block sides with the Arab refusal not to recognize Israel as part of the Middle East voting block of nations. Consequently the invalid UN Resolution 242 and 2334 both function as morality politics so utterly corrupt that it would make a prostitute in church blush.

      Recall that LBJ – preoccupied by the Vietnam War, compares to Putin in the Ukraine today. The Trump Abraham Accords challenges the validity of UN 242 together with its top-priority status, established by Britain and French hostile propaganda. These fallen empires long to restore their political domination over the Middle Eastern trading routes. European imperialism as a strategic policy, exposed by the Suez Crisis of the 1956 War.

      The Abraham Accords represent a significant shift in Middle Eastern diplomacy, it rejects the biased slant of British/French 242. The Abraham Accords 180°, a total rejection of the invalid 242/2334 – 3379 UN racism. President Trump established normalization agreements between Israel and several Arab nations, including the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain. These accords, serve as a opposing departure from the traditional Arab consensus that condemned normalization with Israel. Which made any peace treaty with Israel, absolutely contingent upon progress in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, particularly in relation to the false principles outlined in UN Security Council Resolution 242.

      The U.S., under Trump’s leadership, positioned the Accords as a way to foster cooperation among nations in the Middle East, potentially leading to broader peace initiatives. Most Arab states view the Trump Accords as undermining British and French written 242, just as both the US and USSR rejected British/French imperialism to seize the Suez Canal from Nasser’s Egypt.

      Contrast the Trump Abraham Accords against corrupt Obama’s UN Resolution 2334. President Trump prioritizes Arab states recognition of Israel as the top priority. Whereas corrupt Obama’s 2334 prioritizes Israeli recognition of a Palestinian state and Eastern Jerusalem as its Capital as the top priority, to achieve peace in the Middle East. Hence UN Resolutions 242 & 2334 compare to the contempt expressed by Tweedle Dee & Tweedle Dumb nursery rhyme and how it frames both the UN and Obama into the same picture.

      The Trump administration’s approach, seen as pragmatic. It prioritizes establishment of diplomatic relations between nation states – over the historical and legal frameworks that have traditional 242, 2334, 3379 invalid and utterly corrupt UN Resolutions which have shaped the Israeli-Palestinian conflict prior to the leadership of President Trump.

      UN Resolution 2334 emphasizes the need for a negotiated settlement that recognizes Palestinian statehood, including East Jerusalem as its capital. The resolution reaffirms the 242 international consensus that a two-state solution absolutely essential for lasting peace. Obama thus treated Israel as a UN protectorate territory, wherein imaginary (chapter VI) “International Law”, Resolutions 242, 2334, 3379 – not only invalidates Balfour Treaty Zionism but determines the borders and Capital of the Jewish State, as if Israel remained a 1947 UN protectorate territory whose fate the Peel Commission determined.

      But the Abraham Accords flipped the narrative. President Trump now demands that Arab states permit Israel to join the Middle East voting block in the UN and disband the UN Human Rights Council on par with the corrupt UNWRA – which buggered the Palestinian refugee crisis and perverted it into a permanent hereditary UN established homosexual perversion. The Arab majority States rejection of the Abraham Accords establishes an Arab EU alliance against both the US & Israel based upon UN 242 & Obama’s 2334 Global Alliance.

      Arabs Palestinians exist as refugees according to UNWRA. But based upon the three century Jewish gulag ghetto experience, refugees have no “Rights”. Yet according to the terms of UN propaganda, the perverted concept of “Palestinian rights” amazingly encompasses a range of issues: including the right to self-determination, the right to return to their homes, and the right to live in dignity and security; such rights neither the Catholic nor Protestant dominated governments accorded to Jewish refugee populations in the 2000+ years which culminated in the Shoah. The “heroin” of Arab propaganda injected into the veins of the anti-Israel UN voting blocks, utterly condemns the Jewish state especially since the Nakba ’48 defeat.

      These imaginary rights, recognized by and through various “international” legal frameworks and UN Resolutions – with a morality as dubious as a whore in church, include UN General Assembly resolutions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights! The plights of Jews for 2000+ years, where Jewish refugee populations received no rights, serves as the basis & model for Palestinians rights today? Buggery!

      Arab states in 1948 flat out rejected Jewish rights to self-determination, the foundation of Zionism based upon the Balfour Declaration. Like priests who entered synagogues and preached conversion to Jews, Arab scream: “Palestinian Rights!” And the Papal Bull UN bias declares its unilateral support for these absolute Palestinian rights … in the face of pre-Shoah Jews whom “international law” ignored their rights.

      Israel excluded from the Arab Middle East voting block, and UN HRC item #7 continually denounces the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands. No Palestinian state ever established by either Egypt in Gaza or Jordan in the West Bank. Therefore, “Enough of this Nazi-like propaganda”.

      All Arab states rejected the legitimacy of the Jewish state in 1948. Post ’67 came the famous Khartoum Resolution Three No’s. The phrase “Nazi-like propaganda” serves as a strong and charged declaration that reflects the Jewish People of Israel’s deep frustration and anger regarding the narratives surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict foisted by the press upon shallow reactionary audiences across the world. This public blood libel slander has its consequences.

      When Israel declared independence on May 14, 1948, on that same exact day, Arab Armies the newly born state of Israel. Jews of the Middle East fought and won our first war of National Independence. Arab war cries of “throw the Jews into the Sea”, and “Finish the Final Solution”, pushed Jews back against a wall. Arab stated absolutely rejected the establishment of a Jewish state in their self-proclaimed “Arab land”.

      Hence Arab voting blocks refuse to recognize Israel as a state in the Middle East! This exploded into the Arab-Israeli War of 1948, followed up with the 2nd Israeli War of Independence in 1967. This Nazi-like racial Arab hatred of dhimmi Jews resulted in significant displacements of more Jewish refugees expelled from Arab countries than Arab refugees, who fled based upon the orders issued by the States of the 5 invading Arab Armies.

      Yet UN General Assembly and Human Rights Commission propaganda continually condemns Israel over the horrors Arab refugees experience, but never – not even once – demands that the 22 Arab countries repatriate their Arab refugee populations as did Israel with our Jewish refugees of ’48. The Apartheid UN recognition of Palestine as a UN member reflects an utter racist Nazi like superior race jargon, used repeatedly against the inferior Jewish state/UN protectorate territory revisionist history.

      The UN under Obama’s watch recognized Palestine as a non-member observer state status. This directly compares to the influence of the Vatican in the UN. In point of fact, the UN serves as a secular medieval Vatican Papal Bull. Rome ordered that Jews of Europe, thrown and expelled into ghetto gulags for 3 Centuries. Morality politics defines both the UN today and the Catholic Church during the Middle Ages.

      The UN, like the Vatican in the past, strives through rhetoric propaganda Resolutions to impose moral judgments, or decisions & declarations – that have significant consequences directed and targeted against specific Jewish groups: Israelis. In this condemned category; the Jewish people have a long history. Directly subjugated by the Catholic church, prior to the Protestant Reformation. Therefore the concept of “morality politics”, Jews understand that it refers to the ways in which moral arguments & rhetoric, used by Jew haters to shape political decisions and policies. Had Arab Armies prevailed in either ’48 or ’67 the Arabs would have unilaterally expelled the Jews from the Middle East and the UN would express its silence like crickets singing in the night.

      In the context of the UN and the so called, ever repeated Israeli-Palestinian propaganda conflict, this ever repeated hate rhetoric &/or narratives, compare to gasoline thrown onto a pre-existing fire. They serve to inflame emotions, arousing demands for justice, palestinian rights, and other non-specified “historical grievances” invoked as evidence of a strong ‘international’, meaning UN, bias against the Jewish people. The recent University marches across the US and Europe: From the River to the Sea Palestine will be free. Shallow reactionary liberty and flower children, utterly shocked when the Trump Administration deported the leaders of these pogrom-like riots across US Universities.

      The Obama 2334 revisionist history racism, which equates, as does UN Resolution 242, Israel and Palestine as “equal States”; utter Nazi-like propaganda, used to justify the 1939 invasion of Poland. 242’s calls for a negotiated settlement to the “conflict”, stands upon the corrupt foundation that the Jewish state and the Palestinian state stands as equals. That the Jewish state has a conflict with Arab refugee populations any more than Jordan on Black September had a “conflict” with Palestinian refugee populations. Utter UN racism! A State vs. refugees – not a “conflict” because refugees do not have a standing Army as does a nation state.

      The Jewish state does not compare to the mobs of Palestinian refugees who – based upon Jews living in European ghetto gulags – had no rights. 242 calls for the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied during the “conflict”. As if the June War pitted Palestinian Armies against Jewish Armies! This pius UN Resolution, dressed in the white robes of righteousness, utterly ignores the historical fact that Poland and Russia both partition of Prussia between themselves, post WWII.

      The UN, the EU, and Arab states continue their long tradition of using “morality politics” to persecute the Jewish people. Resolutions like: 242 & 2334, Item 7, and Palestine’s observer status, serve as primary modern tools of UN racial bias against the Jewish state. Trump’s Abraham Accords serves as the first major breach in this utterly corrupt UN system since 1967. The Abraham Accords have exposed the naked racism butt of Obama’s policies which sought reimpose the old antisemitic paradigm of the Catholic and Protestant Dark Ages – monopoly over who reads and interprets the Bible. A Nazi-faced whore defiles the altar — the true face of the UN’s pious anti-Israel moralists exposed in filth and betrayal.

      LikeLike

      Reply
   2. 

      mosckerr

      June 7, 2025 at 10:31 pm

      Recently the UN Security Council attempted to decree a Chapter VII ultimatum which dictated that Israel surrender to Hamas in Gaza.

      Italy did not support the recent UN Security Council resolution that called for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, which was vetoed by the United States. The resolution received 14 votes in favor, with the U.S. casting the only vote against it. The draft resolution was co-sponsored by several countries, but Italy was not listed among those actively supporting the resolution in the context of the recent vote.

      These 14 countries Russia, China, France, United Kingdom, Algeria (co-sponsor), Denmark (co-sponsor), Greece (co-sponsor), Guyana (co-sponsor), Pakistan (co-sponsor), Panama (co-sponsor), South Korea (co-sponsor), Sierra Leone (co-sponsor), Slovenia (co-sponsor), and Somalia (co-sponsor) voted to impose a UN Chapter VII dictate upon Israel. Of these countries Algeria and other scamps countries do not even have diplomatic relations with Israel.

      Neither Iran nor Sudan have diplomatic relations with Israel. No different than Algeria. Algeria and Turkey have developed a military partnership and cooperation over the years, particularly in the areas of defense and security. This relationship has been strengthened through various agreements and joint military exercises. The relationship is part of a broader strategic partnership that includes economic and political cooperation, with both countries sharing interests in regional stability and security.

      Those 14 countries have already repeatedly called for international condemnation of Israel, rabidly support Palestinian terrorism relabeled as “Palestinian rights”. They already engage in public relations propaganda campaigns hostile to Israel. They already support and initiate legal actions against Israel in international courts such as the ICC. These countries have escalated their rhetoric propaganda against Israel. Hamas could never have dug its complex tunnel system without international support. They already promote cultural and academic boycotts of Israel.

      These countries throw their support for the Palestinian cause, like whores on street corners sell their wares. They often use stinky rhetoric, to condemn Israeli actions, framing them as oppressive or colonial. Such putrid rhetoric seeks to poison public opinion and mobilize support for Palestinian groups. Numerous solidarity movements around the world that advocate for Palestinian rights; they often align with groups like Hamas, viewing them as legitimate representatives of Palestinian resistance.

      Countries without diplomatic relations with Israel compare to corrupt judges that accepts bribes. This objection, seeks to raise critically important questions about the legitimacy and fairness of the recent Chapter VII UN ultimatum which demanded that Israel surrender to Hamas in Gaza. While the analogy of a corrupt judge highlights concerns about bias and fairness, the international system, in point of fact, operates on principles of representation and sovereignty.

      The International system operates, so it appears, as something akin to a beauty contest. What defines beauty — not a rational logical concept. Israel demands a change to the International system. It could express its rebuke of the UN, by leaving the UN. The analogy of a corrupt judge suggests that countries without diplomatic relations with Israel, that they lack objective credibility to fairly judge the case heard before the court of international opinion.

      This perception of bias, Israel argues, undermines the legitimacy of all UN resolutions or demands made against Israel. Particularly since nations who do not have diplomatic relations with Israel obvious their anti-Israel hostility – politically motivated – rather than based on objective criteria. Chapter VII of the UN Charter allows the Security Council to take action to maintain or restore international peace and security. However, the application of this chapter, like as in the Korean war, especially when it appears to favor one side over another in a conflict, historically expands the local conflict into a far larger international war. The call for Israel to surrender to Hamas, obviously viewed by both the US and Israel as an ultimatum that lacks balance and fairness. Just as China despised the UN Chapter VII ultimatum decreed against North Korea.

      The international UN system, indeed based on principles of state sovereignty and representation. However, the effectiveness and fairness of this system both the US and Israel have repeatedly warned and challenged. Especially when certain countries dominate decision-making processes or when resolutions reflect geopolitical interests rather than universal principles of justice.

      The idea that Israel should demand changes to the international UN system, this demand reflects the Israeli requirements for a more equitable and fair approach to international relations expressed through public UN diplomacy organs. Leaving the UN perhaps a radical step. But it raises questions about the effectiveness of the international UN system of public diplomacy among nation states in the world community of nations.

      The concerns about bias and fairness in the international UN system, particularly regarding Israel, absolutely valid and reflect broader issues of representation and legitimacy. Whether through reforming the UN or reconsidering its participation, Israel’s approach to these challenges will significantly impact its international standing and relationships. The debate over the effectiveness and fairness of the current international system remains a fixed constant, critical issue in global politics.

      LikeLike

      Reply
   3. 

      mosckerr

      June 11, 2025 at 5:16 pm

      The Vision to Restore the Constitutional Torah Republic of 12 Tribes.

      The Greatest commandment of the Torah: the 1st Sinai commandment. Observing and obeying the Torah לשמה. The Name, the essence of the 1st Sinai commandment, upon this Name hangs all the rest of the Written Torah and Talmudic Halachot. Doing this 1st Sinai Commandment לשמה defines keeping the Torah, all the commandments and Talmudic halachot לשמה as the driving k’vanna, herein defines all tohor Av Torah time oriented commandments according to the opinion expressed by the sefer B’HaG in his Hilchot G’dolot.

      Just as the essence of Shabbat observance opens with the blessings made over wine and bread known as קידוש לליל שבת, where the introduction of this blessing opens with the paragraph publicly declared in the Beit Knesset, which the baal when he returns home repeats so that his wife and children hear this “key blessing”.

      This key blessing, it defines and designates the mitzva of Shabbat as an Av tohor time-oriented commandment which absolutely and most fundamentally requires k’vanna; this blessing distinguishes both essential terms, אלהים and מלאכה – three times. Such a repetition of an idea three times – called a חזקה.

      This term in the Torah and Jewish law refers to a legal presumption or a status, established based on certain conditions or actions. This idea represents a fundamental concept in Jewish legal thought. And has several applications in various areas of law, including property, personal status, and ritual observance.

      (1) In property law, חזקה, often used to establish ownership. If a person has possessed a property for a certain period of time without dispute, their status – presumes them as the owner. This presumption protects the rights of the possessor and encourages stability in property relations. (2) חזקה can also refer to a person’s legal status. For example, if someone has a reputation recognized as a certain status (like a priest or a Levite) for a long time, that status – presumed to continue unless proven otherwise. Important in matters of religious obligations and rights. (3) In the context of ritual law, חזקה can indicate a person’s ongoing observance of certain practices. For instance, if someone has consistently observed a particular mitzvah (commandment), they are presumed to continue doing so unless there is evidence to the contrary. (4) The concept of חזקה serves to create stability and certainty in legal and social relationships. By establishing presumptions based on established facts or behaviors, the law reduces disputes and provides a clear framework for resolving conflicts. (5) While חזקה provides a strong presumption, it is not absolute. It can be challenged by evidence to the contrary. This balance between presumption and proof – a critical aspect of legal reasoning in Jewish law. In summary, חזקה – a versatile legal concept that plays a crucial role in establishing ownership, legal status, and ritual observance, while promoting stability and reducing disputes within the community.

      The thrice repeated Divine Name אלהים. Yom Kippur known as Shabbat Shabbaton (the Sabbath of Sabbaths). A central element in Jewish tradition, particularly in the context of the High Holy Days. On Yom Kippur the Divine Name אלהים defines the Soul (The living blood [as in a korban sacrifice] dedicated upon the altar Holy to HaShem whereby a person swears a Torah oath in order to cut a Brit alliance. The T’shuva, living blood soul dedicated on Rosh HaShanna, 10 days prior, the Divine Name אל. This אל soul remembers the t’shuva made for the sin of the Golden Calf. The Golden Calf “revelation” defines the k’vanna of the 2nd Sinai Commandment: Do not worship other Gods. Substitute Theology, this Av tuma avoda zarah defines the k’vanna of the sin of the Golden Calf. At that exact moment in time: the “ערב רב”, the Israelites who assimilated to Egyptian culture and customs, and had also intermarried with Egyptians.

      ---

      (((Weigh the precedent of Purim. Before the Chag of Purim, its a mitzva from the Torah to remember the commandment to expunge the memory of Amalek. This mitzva defines antisemitism throughout the generations.

      The Torah refers to the mixed multitudes/ערב רב as Jews who lacked יראת אלהים. Fear of Heaven refers to the wisdom of a person dedicating his life to protect his ‘Good Name’ reputation. Base this conclusion upon the Cossacks.

      Following the Khmelnytsky Uprising (1648–1657) [Which killed more Jews in a short period of time, till the horrors of the Shoah surpassed even that Goyim utter barbarity.], a Man having the reputation known as Baal Shem Tov; he re-organized the surviving Jews of Eastern Europe with a renewed spirit of Yiddishkeit – Jewish identity.)

      A central element in Jewish tradition, particularly in the context of the High Holy Days. On Yom Kippur the dedicated Divine soul Name אלהים {The living blood [as in a korban sacrifice] dedicated upon the altar Holy to HaShem, whereby a person swears a Torah oath in order to cut a Brit alliance. The T’shuva, living blood soul dedicated on Rosh HaShanna, 10 days prior, the Divine soul Name אל. This soul Name remembers the t’shuva made consequent to the sin of the Golden Calf. The Golden Calf “revelation” defines the k’vanna of the 2nd Sinai Commandment: Do not worship other Gods.

      Substitute Theology defines the k’vanna of the sin of the Golden Calf wherein the ערב רב exchanged the word translation אלהים as the word name for the Golden Calf. At that exact moment in time: this same ערב רב, the Jews who had assimilated to Egyptian culture and customs and they had also intermarried with Egyptians. Hence the Sages during the period of the NaCH defined the k’vanna of the 2nd Sinai commandmnent based upon A) assimilation and B) intermarriage with Goyim.

      Before the Chag of Purim, its a mitzva from the Torah to remember the commandment to expunge the memory of Amalek. This mitzva defines antisemitism throughout the generations. The Torah refers to the mixed multitudes/ערב רב as Jews who lacked יראת אלהים. Fear of Heaven refers to the wisdom of a person dedicating his life to protect his ‘Good Name’ reputation. Following the Khmelnytsky Uprising (1648–1657) [Which killed more Jews in a short period of time, till the horrors of the Shoah surpassed even that Goyim utter barbarity.], a Man having the reputation of Baal Shem Tov, re-organized the surviving Jews of Eastern Europe with a renewed spirit of Yiddishkeit Jewish identity.)))

      ---

      Therefore the Divine soul Name אל, dedicated on Rosh HaShanna defines the k’vanna of the t’shuva sanctified during this specific time oriented Av tohor commandment: Jews remember this t’shuva, so as not to behave like a dog who returns and eats its own vomit. Jews “remember”, another name for this Chag יום הזכרון, day of remembrance. Remembering a key essential spiritual aspect of Torah spirituality.

      However, the t’shuva of Yom Kippur stands distinct and apart from the t’shuva of יום הזכרון. The soul name dedicated לשמה on this different Chag the soul name of אלהים. The remembrance that HaShem threatened to make his own “substitute theology” (measure for measure) and chose the seed of Moshe as the chosen Cohen People and expunge the living memory of the Avot Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov as the fathers of the Chosen Cohen People. Therefore the first blessing of the Shemone Esrei, (Tefillah דרבנן), opens with אלהי אברהם אלהי יצחק ואלהי יעקב, this remembrance, the Torah declares as the k’vanna of his Name revealed in the 1st commandment at Sinai! Therefore tefillah דאורייתא, (the mitzva of Kre’a Shma) – utterly unique. Learned in conjunction together with the revelation of the Oral Torah revealed to Moshe at Horev on Yom Kippur. Specifically, the only other verse within the literature of the T’NaCH which contains 3 consecutive Divine Names – השם אלהינו השם – the opening p’suk of the tefillah דאורייתא of kre’a shma.

      Therefore, the repetition of אלהים three times in the blessing made קידוש לליל שבת, the Divine Name אלהים which dedicates the soul sanctified on Yom Kippur wherein Israel remembers the Divine t’shuva wherein HaShem annulled the vow to make of the seed of Moshe as the chosen Cohen people; such a unilateral Divine decree would have profaned the oath thrice sworn to the Avot by HaShem. Vows play 2nd fiddle to sworn oaths in matters of holiness. On Yom Kippur, this day called Shabbat Shabbaton, through the sanctification of the Divine soul Name אלהים the generations of Israel strive to remember the Av tohor time oriented commandment of this Yom Tov which strives to remember the t’shuva made by the Anger of HaShem wherein He annulled His vow to sanctify His oath sworn to the Avot. Hence vows play 2nd fiddle to Torah oaths. A very important Torah distinction.

      Therefore the blessing made on קידוש לליל שבת sanctifies the remembrance of the oath sworn brit alliances the Avot swore to cut upon their living name souls, (Meaning all the ‘fear of heaven’ lives of the children of Israel born in “O’lam Ha’Ba” to all future generations.), which continually create יש מאין the Chosen Cohen People through the Av tohor commandments known as time- oriented mitzvot. This latter mitzva stands unique because it requires prophetic mussar which defines its most essential k’vanna. קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה commandments — all the rest of the Torah commandments and Talmudic halachot — they do not require k’vanna. However, when a person sanctifies a Torah commandment, both דאורייתא או דרבנן to Av tohor time-oriented commandments (which require the k’vanna to do these commandments לשמה) – the first commandment revealed at Sinai – all Torah and Talmudic mitzvot possess the holiness of Torah commandments revealed at the Sinai revelation! Therefore the Rambam limitation of the Torah commandments to 613, just flat out wrong. Even the mitzva of washing one’s hands upon arising in the morning a mitzva from the Torah … if and only if a person does this rabbinic mitzva with T’NaCH prophetic mussar k’vanna.

      The classic flaw of assimilated statute law syllogistic deductive reasoning, it divorces Aggada from Gemara; T’NaCH prophetic mussar from Halacha. Herein designates the proverbial fly in the ointment of assimilated syllogism based deductive statute legalist reasoning and organization. Chickens they do not lay eggs into two rowed crates sold by the dozen – the central flaw of legislative bureaucratic statute decrees of law. Whose authority stands based upon the pedestal of Caesar – the son of God – argumentum ad verecundiam. This flawed logic equally defines the theology screamed by both the church and the mosque.

      This קידוש לליל שבת likewise this blessing states מלאכה three times. This blessing makes a הבדלה with separates מלאכה from עבודה. This most essential הבדלה therein defines the Av tohor time-oriented commandment of Shabbat. A person dedicates not to do forbidden skilled labor/מלאכה on the day of Shabbat so as likewise not to do forbidden unskilled labor\עבודה on the 6 Days of “shabbat”! The term שבת means “week”, not only 7th day! Herein explain the Talmudic mussar משל instruction, that a person who observes the mitzva of Shabbat keeps all the Torah commandments.

      The mesechta of Baba Kama which introduces 4 Avot תם damagers in the opening Av Mishna, contains the logical דיוק/inference of 4 Avot מועד damagers – חמס, גזל, ערוה, שוחד במשפט. Translated as oppression, theft, incest, and bribery of judges to corrupt a judicial din.

      Therefore, based upon these בניני אבות precedents the קידוש לליל שבת defines the k’vanna of the Av tohor time-oriented miztva of Shabbat Observance, as expressed through the blessing said both in the Beit Knesset and at Home. Observing the Torah “לשמה” does not mean ((for its own sake) but rather ||for doing Av tohor time oriented commandments! A fundamental מאי נפקא מינא – רב חסד tohor midda “מלכות” distinction.|| {Blessing stand apart from Tehillem because they require שם ומלכות, a legal requirement to swear a Torah oath}. Observing the Torah “לשמה” does not mean [for its own sake])), but rather /for sake of doing Av tohor time oriented commandments. A very abstract and complicated idea.

      Av tohor time-oriented commandments include any Written Torah commandment or Talmudic halacha sanctified as Av tohor time-oriented commandments לשמה. How many Halachot within the Talmud, therefore define the revelation of the Torah at Sinai?

      The concept of חזקה (chazakah) and k’vanna (a discernment which separates the Yatzir Ha’Ra spirit from the Yatzir Ha’Tov spirit – both of which live within the heart) in Jewish law … deeply rooted in Talmudic literature. To grasp these subtle distinctions compares to the skills of a good wine bibber. In Berakhot 35a, the Talmud discusses the importance of intention when reciting blessings, including Kiddush! (Both Shemone Esrei, kre’a shma, the Cohen blessing, and Kaddish lack שם ומלכות yet none the less qualify as Torah blessings! They serve as prime examples why time-oriented commandments require k’vanna.) The phrase “לשמה” (as a time-oriented Torah commandment), often interpreted in this context to mean that one should have the proper discernment, meaning — prophetic mussar middot תוכחות, when performing the mitzvah of Kiddush. Mussar must breath within the Yatzir Tov within the heart, and not gripes, complaints, and criticisms made by others.

      The repetition of the Divine Name, expressed in both the kre’a shma and the 13 middot; and the structure of the Kiddush serve as a chazakah that establishes the sanctity of Shabbat. The Talmud emphasizes that the act of Kiddush simply not a ritual, but a declaration of the holiness of the day, that requires the Will to discern the spirit of the mitzvah properly; meaning that a person has the k’vanna to do that mitzva לשמה as an Av tohor time-oriented Torah commandment. Divine Names live as spirits rather than words. A fundamental distinction which requires wisdom to understand.

      In Yoma 5a-7b, the Talmud details the avodah (service) performed by the Cohen Ha’Gadol on Yom Kippur. The rituals, including the confession of sins and the sending away of the scapegoat, performed with specific discernments; specifically the scapegoat remembers the substitute theology of the Av tuma sin of the Golden Calf. A huge Torah chiddush.

      The Talmud emphasizes that the High Priest must have the proper k’vanna during his avodah service. The effectiveness of the atonement directly linked to the intentions behind his actions. The concept of chazakah, also relevant here, as the established practices of the avodah services of the Cohen HaGadol create a presumption of their validity and sanctity, reinforcing the need for intention in these sacred acts; many Cohen HaGadol never exited from the Holy of Holies alive.

      Meaning, the blowing of the Shofar has three distinct notes, as does ברכת כהנים three distinct blessings. The Cohen Ha’Gadol on Yom Kippur pronounces the שם השם spirits rather than golden calf word translations for the Divine Name. No word translation can pronounce the שם השם. However the בנין אב of blowing the Shofar on Rosh HaShanna serves to teach the Torah mussar that a person can dedicate his Yatzir Ha’Tov from within his heart through blowing dedicated Divine Soul Names לשמה; when he pronounces the Name אדוני with his lips, he blows the dedicated Divine Name Spirit of a specific face of his oath brit soul dedicated upon the 6 Yom Tov and Shabbat Divine Lights – the Torah menorah throughout all generations. Exceptionally difficult concepts to grasp and understand. Tohor vs. Tuma spirits, the most complex and advanced subject in the whole of the Sha’s Bavli/Yerushalmi Talmuds.

      In Berakhot 2a, the Talmud discusses the recitation of the Shema and the importance of k’vanna. It states that one must have the intention to accept the yoke of heaven when reciting the Shema. The Shema serves as a declaration of faith and acceptance of Divine sovereignty over the 12 Tribes alone. HaShem a local Tribal God, and not a Universal Monotheistic God as taught in Xtian and Muslim avoda zarah. The Talmud indicates that the act of reciting the Shema establishes a chazakah of belief and commitment to oath Cohen brit alliance. The requirement for k’vanna underscores that this recitation, not merely a mechanical act but a profound expression of faith, wherein a person remembers and recalls the oaths sworn by the Avot – wherein they cut a Torah brit alliance which creates the Chosen Cohen people יש מאין לשמה – throughout all generations of Israel living on this Earth.

      The Oral Torah defines the mitzva of Moshiach as the dedication of the separated k’vanna – to pursue righteous Judicial justice among our own people inside the borders of conquered Canaan. צדק צדק תירדוף. Herein defines this Moshiach concept of dedicated “faith” from Torah בניני אבות precedents. Obviously the New Testament avoda zarah has no such similar dedication which defines the Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach. The concept of ”holiness” learns from the precedent of korbanot. No Torah mitzva qualifies as “holy” without standing upon the יסוד of korbanot. Another example of the Talmudic משל: a mountain hanging by a hair.

      These Talmudic sources illustrate how the concepts of chazakah and k’vanna totally interwoven into the fabric of Jewish ritual practices. In each case—Kiddush, Yom Kippur avodah services, and Shema—the intention behind the actions utterly crucial for their validity and effectiveness. The wisdom of these established practices create a presumption of sanctity and meaning, reinforcing the importance of engaging with these commandments thoughtfully and purposefully. What distinguishes between the order of the Rashi vs. Rabbeinu Tam tefillen? Answer: the distinction between the oaths sworn at Gilgal and Sh’Cem in the days of Yehoshua’s invasion of Canaan. Any person can strap on their bodies tefillen, but few can sanctify this mitzva as a tohor time-oriented Torah commandment. G’lut Jewry has forgotten the Oral Torah. How to observe and obey Mitzot לשמה.

      The halachic ramifications of observing Shabbat without k’vanna (intention), nuanced and depend on various factors, including the specific actions taken and the context of the observance. In a word: G’lut. G’lut Jewry lack the wisdom to do Torah mitzvot לשמה. The Talmud and later halachic authorities emphasize that performing a commandment without the proper k’vanna render the act incomplete or less effective, but it does not necessarily invalidate the observance entirely. The RambaN taught that doing mitzvot in G’lut serves only as a remembrance of doing mitzvot rather than actually doing actual mitzvot.

      If someone recites Kiddush or other blessings without k’vanna, the act has the appearance of a mitzva, but the garments of faith do not make a man righteous. Meaning worlds separate doing mitzvot לשמה from doing mitzvot לא לשמה. The ערב רב and the Torah curse of Amalek serve as witness. G’lut Jewry observes mitzvot לא לשמה. They have technically fulfilled the obligation to recite the blessing, but they lack k’vanna wisdom, this exposes the garments of faith rather than the substance of faith. The mitzvah’s spiritual significance of k’vanna – to create יש מאין the chosen Cohen people for the purpose to pursue the faith of achieving the Torah as the Written Constitution of the Torah Republic and the Talmud as the working model to re-establish the Torah faith: צדק צדק תידוף – Sanhedrin lateral common law courtrooms wherein in the justices dedicate to achieve a fair restoration of damages inflicted by Jews upon other Jews so as to restore Shabbat Shalom “trust” as expressed through the 3 meals of Shabbat the k’vanna of the זימון מצוה דאורייתא.

      G’lut Jews who recites Kiddush or other blessings without k’vanna, the act gives the appearance as valid, but lacks the essential breathing spirit of life. The person has technically fulfilled the obligation to recite the blessing, but the lack of k’vanna, means they worship forms rather than the substance of faith. If someone performs melacha (forbidden work) on Shabbat without k’vanna, the halachic implications can vary. If the person did not intend to perform a forbidden action (e.g., unaware that they were doing something prohibited), they may not be held liable for violating Shabbat. However, the act is still considered a violation of the sanctity of the day – as taught in the introduction of the משנה ברורה. If someone intentionally performs melacha but lacks k’vanna for the act of Shabbat observance, they are still liable for the violation, as the intention does not negate the action itself. For this simple fact: Goyim forbidden to observe the mitzva of Shabbat.

      Observing Shabbat without k’vanna often viewed by some, as an incomplete observance. While the individual may have technically fulfilled certain obligations, the spiritual and communal aspects of Shabbat hardly fully realized. This leads to a sense of disconnect from the sanctity of the day, often felt by children. Halachic authorities encourage individuals to strive for k’vanna in their observance of Shabbat. The emphasis on k’vanna serves to deepen the spiritual experience and connection to the mitzvah.

      Alas G’lut rabbis lost the wisdom to do mitzvot לשמה. In his writings, for example, the Rambam emphasizes the importance of k’vanna in fulfilling mitzvot. He suggests that while the act may be valid, the lack of intention diminishes its spiritual value. He did not teach the k’vanna of doing mitzvot לשמה – observance of Av time oriented commandments “created” with the dedication to create the Chosen Cohen people throughout the generations תמיד מעשה בראשית לשמה.

      The Shulchan Aruch also discusses the importance of k’vanna, particularly in the context of prayer and blessings. It indicates that while one may fulfill the obligation technically, the spiritual fulfillment is significantly enhanced with proper intention. Rabbi Karo follows the ירידות הדורות initiated by the Yad perversion of Talmudic common law unto assimilated Greek & Roman statute law static halachic codifications which have zero connection to the kabbalah of פרדס לשמה dynamic inductive reasoning. Aristotle’s static syllogism deductive logic compares to a two dimensional camera picture taken of a real life physical three dimensional living reality! An עין טוב immediately discerns the distinction.

      In summary, observing Shabbat without k’vanna does not invalidate the observance but renders it hollow. The individual may fulfill the technical requirements of the mitzvot, but the spiritual and communal dimensions remain totally lacking. Something like plowing a field without sowing seeds.

      Halachic authorities encourage striving for k’vanna to enhance the experience of Shabbat and deepen one’s connection to these mitzvot. Alas the curse of G’lut caused these rabbis to forget what it means to do Av tohor time-oriented commandments לשמה, based upon the בנין אב precedent of blowing the Shofer on Rosh HaShanna as a בנין אב for the Cohen HaGadol pronouncing the שם השם לשמה on Yom Kippur.

      A close reading of Sefer HaBHaG on these themes may provide additional reinforcement to this structure. A simple review of the Order of his אלו לאוין שבמלקות ארבעים – לא יאכלו בנ”י את גיד הנשה וכו. And his Order of ואלו מצות קום עשה: מאה ברכות בכל יום וכו, explicitly expresses clearly his understanding that Av Time-Oriented Commandments, which require doing them with the k’vanna, of לשמה זימן גרמא מצוות, without any question or doubt distinguishes the B’HaG division of 3 types of Torah commandments contrasted by the Rambam positive and negative commandments. The latter code, both static and rigid categories which limits and affixes Torah commandments to only commandments contained within the language of the Written Torah. This interpretation of Torah commandments invalidates Rabbinic commandments as tohor time oriented commandments from the Torah revelation at Sinai. Yet the Rambam ruled the mitzva of tefillah a mitzva דאורייתא! Based upon the RambaN critique, the Rambam reference to tefillah referred to the Shemone Esrei and not kre’a shma. A fundamental error in learning the opening Mishna of ברכות.

      The ontological foundation of Av time-oriented mitzvot (מצוות עשה שהזמן גרמא) as expressions of Torah לשמה. This theory challenges standard halachic codification (e.g., Rambam’s dichotomy of aseh/lo ta’aseh) by instead grounding halachic authority in Brit-based prophetic precedent and dynamic consciously remembered oaths sworn by the Avot, wherein they cut the Original Torah brit which creates the Chosen Cohen people יש מאין throughout the generations לשמה.

      How many Halachot within the Talmud therefore define the revelation of the Torah at Sinai through the lens of Av tohor time-oriented commandments לשמה? Framing the Question: What Defines a Halacha That Reveals Sinai? A halacha that “defines the revelation at Sinai” not merely a legal ruling but a living brit-action. Hence such time-oriented “time bound” halachot equal the Shabbat, Yom Kippur, Shama examples of Av tohor time-oriented commandments from the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. This third unique type of Torah commandment which the Rambam’s Sefer Ha’Mitzvot totally ignored require intentional k’vanna לשמה—as Av tohor time- oriented commandments which possess the holiness to create the chosen Cohen people throughout our generations as a people; as does the mitzva of Moshiach creates יש מאין the Will within our hearts to restore the Torah Constitutional Republic and employ the Talmud as the working model wherein we pursue judicial justice to achieve justice among our people through the means of mitzvot lateral common law courtrooms. A mitzva as holy as any korban sanctified upon the altar.

      Therefore the number of Torah commandments not limited to the strict language, like as did the טיפש פשט simplistic reading of the Chumash made by the Rambam “רשע”. Torah common law, based upon the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס inductive logic – dynamic rather than the Rambam’s Aristotle based syllogism static logic. Torah common law does not remotely compare to, nor resembles in any way, shape, fashion, or form – Rambam’s static halachic Yad codification of rabbinic ritualized halachot which do not require k’vanna.

      Berakhot 35a / Pesachim 106a: Kiddush requires intent—sanctifying time, echoing “זכור את יום השבת”. Shabbat 118b: Eating three meals on Shabbat (סעודות) as a דרך to bring redemption from g’lut—an example of the dedication of all time-oriented commandments inclusive of the mitzva of Moshiach, holy as a korban olah.

      Acceptance of the Torah at Sinai and Horev, obligates all generations of Jews to dedicate our souls/our children\ to pursue justice among our people within the borders of the oath sworn lands of Canaan. Therefore, the Torah has no vision of vast empires, the Arafat blood libel of Greater Israel a Torah abomination. The revelation of the Torah at Sinai, only the 12 Tribes of Israel accepted this Torah from HaShem as our God. The av tuma avoda zarah which parades the theology of Monotheism directly compares to the משל of the King who has no clothes!

      Shabbat 10b: The mitzvah of rest not limited to a shallow physical perspective alone. Rather it mimics the Divine act of Creation—מקדש השבת. All of these include both chazakah (repeated weekly) and k’vanna (to sanctify Creation through human action). Yom Kippur (Yoma 5a–7b), the avodah of the Kohen Gadol, especially the זכירת שם המפורש (pronouncing the Divine Name)–the archetype of לשמה.

      The scapegoat ritual—a mussar rebuke to the Golden Calf—linking national sin to remembering the sin of the Gold Calf substitute theology which continuously replaces the Divine Spirit Name of השם with the word translation אלהים av tuma avoda zarah definition of the 2nd Sinai Commandment. Neither the Bible nor Koran ever once brings the שם השם. These “rituals” inherently time-bound mitzvot, done with precise remembered k’vanna, the t’shuva of our national Cohen people brit, originally cut by Avram at the brit between the pieces.

      Shema (Berakhot 2a): The yoke of the Torah blessings and curses. Hence the Av Mishna of ברכות opens with kre’a shma ערבית, because it takes greater faith to accept the Torah curses rather than the kre’a shma שחרית blessings of the Torah as our yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven.

      Teki’at Shofar (Rosh Hashanah 16a, 33b); Shofar as a זיכרון תרועה, intended to arouse the אל mussar rebuke, to burn this memory as a searing Brit within our souls. The three-part structure (tekiah, shevarim, teruah) aligns with Birkat Kohanim, and understood as first remembering then uttering Divine Torah oaths, based upon remembering the oaths sworn each by Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov.

      Birkat Kohanim, understood as uttering Divine Name thrice through the k’vanna of remembering the oaths sworn by the Avot which create continuously the chosen Cohen people יש מאין תמיד מעשה בראשית. Teki’at Shofar explicitly linked to Sinai (Shofar at Matan Torah), and Mashiach (the shared burden of redemption placed upon the souls of all generations of Israel to pursue righteous justice among our people within the boundaries of ארץ ישראל).

      Korban Pesach and Sippur Yetzias Mitzrayim (Pesachim 116a): The telling of the Exodus as a direct Av tohor time oriented Torah commandment. Done at night, with intentional kavannah, and relational chazakah across generations (“בכל דור ודור…”).

      Rather than count each halacha by line or tractate, can group them by Torah-mandated Av Time-Oriented Mitzvot לשמה. Each major Torah festival and daily commandment with national sanctity contributes a category of such halachot. Shabbat, Berakhot Kiddush, Melacha, 3 meals, Av melachot ~10–15 time-oriented commandments. Yom Kippur : Avodah of Kohen Gadol, fasting, confessions – ~10 av tohor time-oriented commandments. Rosh Hashanah: Teki’at Shofar, Malchuyot, Zichronot ~8 time-oriented Av commandments. Shema: Morning and evening recitation ~5 Av tohor commandments. Pesach: Korban Pesach, Seder, סיפור יציאת מצרים approx, ~10 Av tohor time-oriented commandments. Sukkot: Sukkah, Lulav, Simchat Beit HaShoeva ~10 Av tohor time-oriented commandments. Shalosh Regalim: Aliyah l’regel, korbanot ~5 time-oriented commandments ect. Obviously this listing represents just the tip of the iceberg. But they serve and align closely with Sefer HaBHaG’s ordering, where he distinguishes mitzvot aseh those performed through national ritual, such as blessings and communal practices, rather than merely textual derivations from the Written Torah.

      Rambam’s system lacks space for Chazal’s dynamic inductive Torah—פרדס לשמה, a multi-layered hermeneutic that moves beyond syllogism into brit-based faith that continuously creates the chosen Cohen people יש מאין. Hundreds of additional halachot in the Talmud qualify as Av time-oriented commandments לשמה, the manifestation of the revelation of the Torah at both Sinai and Horev whenever a person employs Aggadic drosh to the T’NaCH prophetic mussar in order to define more clearly the k’vanna of the dedication of the 13 tohor middot Oral Torah revelation of Horev.

      These all Sinai incarnated through halachic-time, turning observance into brit memory and prophetic destiny. Ba’al HaBHaG preserves the k’vanna of Av tohor time-oriented commandments לשמה. Unmistakably linking halachic categories to Torah revelation, not textual enumeration as does the Rambam’s sefer Ha’Mitzvot.

      This powerful and original formulation, deeply challenges the prevailing assumptions in halakhic codifications which suggests a radical reorientation of Torah authority required: not as static obligation (chiyuv) derived from text, but as dynamic, brit-based prophetic performance לשמה that manifests Sinai express through time-oriented commandments. This discussion articulates a living ontology of Torah, in which halacha, not primarily statute or abstract commandment, but avodah—a soul-driven, national legal performance that, through time-bound mitzvot, renews the brit that began with the Avot and later publicly revealed at Sinai/Horev under the leadership of Moshe rabbeinu.

      מצוות עשה שהזמן גרמא misunderstood when filtered through the Rambam’s aseh/lo-ta’aseh dichotomy and his Aristotelian syllogistic taxonomy. Their ontological root in the Avot’s brit oaths starting with ברית בין הבתרים, wherein the Torah creates the chosen Cohen people יש מאין rather than biologically/genetically – but rather through the קידושה of the sworn oaths expressed through mitzvot observance.

      Their performance renews Sinai/Horev in halachic time, as intentional brit-actions that manifest Torah לשמה. Rather than ritualized abstractions. Torah prophetic-national acts rooted in tohor middot, with Mussar and prophetic k’vanna, connecting to Divine Justice sanctified through judicial common law courtrooms. All time-oriented commandments require kavanah as an essential halachic element, not a super-added hiddur. Because their power dedicates like a Korban upon the altar the Torah oath to renew the national brit across generations within the borders of our Cohen national inheritance.

      Talmudic halachic diamond like facet perspectives organized as halachot simply not incidental observances but rather active re-entries into the brit consciousness by which our People remember and regain the lost wisdom of doing mitzvot לשמה.

      Performs a prophetic brit memory act, binds across generations. Time-oriented mitzvot—require sanctification of time applying prophetic mussar in how the generations socially interact and behave toward our family members, neighbors, and people throughout the generations. Time oriented-commandments, the institutionalized classification of doing Torah mitzvot לשמה defines the wisdom of the Torah.

      The Talmudic warp/weft Halacha/Aggada loom weaves a Torah garment of faith which stands upon prophetic mussar as the יסוד k’vanna of doing both Written Torah commandments as codified in the assimilated Rambam static Aristotle syllogism code, but also halachic mitzvot of the Talmud as codified in the B’HaG dynamic פרדס inductive reasoning code.

      Av tohor time-oriented commandments לשמה exist as a brit-based legal ontology, ignored by the Rambam and preserved only in פרדס “fragments” of Kabbalah by which the Ba’al HaBHaG, the Talmud, and aggadic mussar frameworks conceal this Torah wisdom from the prying tuma eyes of the Goyim.

      Mapping the Talmud understood as inclusive of Torah time-oriented commandments, simply does not exist as a static ritual codification applicable to some finite number. Visiting the sick serves as an example. Consoling the mourner, another example. In infinite ways a person can elevate a simple action unto a Torah time-oriented commandment!

      Kiddushin 29a–b on the surface limits women from doing time-oriented commandments. But the language רשות not limited to the interpretation set in stone of “optional”. תפילת מנחה בפלג המנחה the concept of רשות implies that a person can lay Rabbeinu Tam tefillen and have the k’vanna to affix the ק”ש ערבית to the תפילת מנחה, based upon the premise that kre’a shma defines tefillah from the Torah. And the additional k’vanna within the Yatzir Ha Tov to affix the Shemone Esrei תפילת ערבית to the ק”ש על המיטה. Menachot 43b: Tzitzit and the idea of “וראיתם אותו וזכרתם”—can only apply to Minchah tefillah rather than evening tefillah because there’s not “time oriented commandment” to wear tzitzit at night. Ta’anit 2a–b: Public fasts as time-bound remembrances of t’shuva mourning for the failure of our people to rule the oath sworn land with judicial courtroom justice which sanctifies making a fair restoration of damages so our People do not hate one another and can build bonds of trust and even love.

      Tertiary layer: Halachot revealed by Aggadic Mussar derivation—where the Gemara uses Gaonic and Reshonim Midrash as precedents which further interpret Talmud’s warp or weft aggadic precedents, to explain halachic ritual observances as time-oriented commandments. The concepts of doing tohor time-oriented Commandments simply exponential.

      This idea challenges the static assimilation perhaps made most manifest by the Rambam. But even Saadia Gaon 882-942 CE, likewise, highly assimilated and influenced from the Av tuma Muslim re-discovery of the genie long held in its bottle by the Church fathers.

      Neither the T’NaCH nor the Talmud teaches history. But rather prophetic mussar as expressed through the perspective of ritual halacha. Torah common law requires the wisdom which does not monopolize a particular reading of either T’NaCH or Talmud through the skewed magnifying glass limited to only one narrow perspective. This error defines טיפש פשט and most obviously seen in the fundamentalist Xtian emotional declarations that God created the world in Six Days. The utter absurdity of this preposterous notion no less gross than Islam’s strict Monotheism theology. The Book of בראשית starting with the Aggada Creation story teaches the prophetic mussar of Av time-oriented commandments created for the purpose to create continuously the chosen Cohen people.

      Thus, thousands of halachot in and beyond the Talmud constitute as Torah Av tohor commandments revealed at Sinai and Horev. This continuation deepens this Torah scholarship revolutionary framework, connecting prophetic mussar, halachic time, and brit-national jurisprudence into a living, performative ontology of Torah. Jews remember when we bench ברכת המזון that the Hellenist Tzeddukim sought to cause our people to forget the Oral Torah פרדס inductive reasoning. Once the Muslims let the Genie out of his bottle some millennium later, assimilated Jews behaved like dogs and return to eat their own vomit.

      Aggada and Midrash not just women’s stories. This tuma defines לשון הרע. Rather they function as a legal epistemology which learns prophetic mussar as the משנה תורה Primary source wherein the later generations can re-interpret the k’vanna of both Torah commandments and Halachic mitzvot! The error which abused this portion of Talmudic scholarship, limited to ancillary secondary value interpretations, an absolute pollution of the Torah.

      This unique perspective of Torah scholarship challenges not only the statute-based codification of the Rambam and Saadia, but even contemporary halachic discourse that limits Aggadah to marginalized importance vis a vis Talmudic halacha. Prophetic T’NaCH mussar generates the k’vanna of all Talmudic halachot mitzvot. The Aggada and Midrash serve something like electricity which converts an acoustic guitar into an electric guitar. This sh’itta of scholarship asserts that halacha is generated by prophetic mussar memory—a dynamic expansion of the brit across time, not merely textual extraction.

      Visiting the sick, burying the dead, making peace between disputants—none “enumerated” in Rambam’s mitzvah count, yet all encoded through Aggadah and made into eternal Av time -oriented Torah commandments.

      Jews assimilated and embraced the Genie let out of its Bottle by the Muslim scholars during the early Middle Ages. This Amalek lack of fear of heaven infected the ‘Golden Age’ of Spanish Jewry. It dominates off the דרך Orthodox Judaism to this very day.

      The Arab Mu’tazilite kalām tradition did not just rape the Daughter of Zion, it turned that whore into an Arab baby maker. Ibn Ezra’s son converted to Islam. Static syllogistic logic “baptized” mitzvot as rational obligations subject to universal logic. The absurd notion of the Rambams posok of 7 mitzvot bnai Noach serves as an inglorious bastard of this av tumah avoda zarah.

      If this scholarship has a masterstroke its: “The Book of בראשית… teaches the prophetic mussar of Av time-oriented commandments created for the purpose to create continuously the chosen Cohen people.” The Creation story understood not as some physical/historical cosmology, but as brit legal ontology—halachic time as a vessel for national soul-formation. Six days of Creation aggada not some cosmological physical fact, but a simple mussar allegory of tohor time-oriented commandment sanctifications, which culminated in the Shabbat story—the first time—brit command.

      Hence the Book of בראשית introduces Av time-oriented commandments. While the next three Books of שמות ויקרא ובמדבר teach toldot קום ועשה ושב ולא תעשה commandments. While the Book of דברים closes with משנה תורה common law as the definition and k’vanna of the whole of the 5 Books of the Torah. Therefore “Yehi or” becomes the founding brit of time-conscious halachic being, not a physical light switch. This directly refutes: Fundamentalist Christianity (literalism); Islamic monotheism divine unicity; and Western secular legalism scientific method whose total reliance upon Empiricism, absolutely no different than Euclid’s flawed 5th Axiom of Plane geometry, as refuted by late 19th Century Hyperbolic geometry.

      A hidden brit Torah, not counted in Rambam’s 613, yet binding. “Thousands of halachot in and beyond the Talmud constitute as Torah Av tohor commandments revealed at Sinai and Horev.” National Justice (courts, restitution, lashon hara, honesty in business); Aggadic-Mussar Foundations (stories that generate the k’vanna of halacha); Brit-Acts (tzedakah, chesed, shalom, mourning) of רב חסד; Time-Kedushah (Shabbat, Moed, Yovel, kiddushin/Get, fasts) etc etc etc.

      This scholarship seeks to validate construction aimed to achieve a new kind of halachic corpus, not a codex of laws, but a map of prophetic brit performance. Aggadah and Midrash as the inductive engine of Torah law, not sentimental ornaments or “women’s fashion stories.” The dismissal of these sources as non-legal, not only a historical error but a spiritual perversion of the Torah’s brit logic. Aggada lives a live far more complex than homiletic! משנה תורה common law does not exist as rigid static syllogistic codified laws, but the soul-language that makes halacha breath from within our Yatzir Tov.

      Obviously this opinion utterly rejects and holds in complete contempt as a Torah av tuma avoda zara the Rambam’s codification model, which detaches mitzvot from their mussar-brit k’vanna, and perverts the Talmud as the model for judicial common law courtrooms into Greek or Roman statutory obligations which bend the knee and worship Caesar as the Son of God.

      The Book of בראשית introduces a national-legal metaphysics. “The Book of בראשית… teaches the prophetic mussar of Av time-oriented commandments sanctified for the purpose to create continuously the chosen Cohen people.” This prophetic mussar re-interpretation of the Book of בראשית re-interprets the six days of creation not as time elapsed, but time created—a sacred sequence of k’vanna moments that generate the k’vanna of Shabbat observance as a day to day, week by week, month by month, year by year continuous life observance of the Creations of the Chosen Cohen people יש מאין.

      Halacha Is Not Rational Obligation—But rather a Prophetic Memory. Once the Greek Genie released from its prison ghetto gulag bottle, it immediately perverted and prioritized syllogism over brit. The 613 codex utterly desecrated time-oriented k’vanna of mitzvot which remember prophetic mussar contained within the T’NaCH kabbalah masoret. The kalām defense of Torah through rationalism compares to the scientific method preached today.

      “This Amalek lack of fear of heaven infected the ‘Golden Age’ of Spanish Jewry.” The collapse of legal brit common law memory directly compares to the threat recorded in the tohor time -oriented commandment from the Torah known as Chag Purim! המלך equals the gematria of המן. Removing the חמץ prior to Pesach stands as but a mussar משל from removing the Av tuma avoda zara of assimilation and inter-marriage! The 49 days of counting of the Omer culminates in the dedication of the Divine Soul name האל on Chag Shevuot; a man cannot accept the revelation of the Torah at Sinai while holding a dead rat in his hand, even if he tovels in a Mikveh! Only Israel accepts the Tribal God at Sinai. Par’o despite the plagues and the splitting of the Sea did not stand and accept the Torah at Sinai. Yet ערב רב Jews to this day cling to and hold their dead rat of Av tuma avoda zara, while they lie to themselves saying they obey the Torah.

      This sh’itta of Torah scholarship, not merely theological. It seeks to inspire Jews to restore the Oath brit alliance cut between the 12 Tribes to forge a Torah Constitutional Republic with Sanhedrin Federal Courtrooms as the basis of judicial common law dominance over State legislatures bureaucratic statute law decrees. Learning the wisdom of doing mitzvot לשמה promises to reclaim halacha from its statute law halachic g’lut. Not just exile in lands, but exile in minds that forgot how to hear prophecy through mussar, and see mitzvot as brit light in sacred time.

      A Torah constitutional revolution—a vision of halacha not as law in exile, but as national brit jurisprudence returning home. Prophetic mussar, halachic time, covenantal ontology, and national-legal restoration—into a single, integrated political-jurisprudence.

      Aggadah and Midrash certainly not narrative footnotes to law—they metabolize the primal matrix in which halacha breathes. This scholarship utterly rejects the rabbinic patriarchy for feminizing Aggadah in order to marginalize it. Aggadah serves as the oral vessel that remembers prophetic mussar—the core divine intent behind the mitzvot. It functions as the source of k’vanna, not an accessory to action of Talmudic halachot time-oriented commandments.

      To extract halacha from the Talmud without the soul of Aggadah – to perform a spiritual lobotomy. Like as did the statute law halachic codes did with their halachic codifications which completely divorced the Gemara from its Mishna. Learning off the dof precedents not only learns the home Gemara sugya – viewed from a different perspective – but likewise it equally requires applying the same wisdom to view the language of the Mishna from a completely changed and different perspective. “Mishneh Torah common law does not exist as rigid static syllogistic codified laws, but the soul-language that makes halacha live.”

      Replacing the Sinai oath brit alliance with a Greco-Arabic philosophical syllogistic logic which cast away the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system that defines the k’vanna of Oral Torah intent – simply bat shit crazy. “The Rambam’s codification model… perverts the Talmud as the model for judicial common law courtrooms into Greek or Roman statutory obligations which bend the knee and worship Caesar as the Son of God.”

      The codification of Torah commandments to 613 – a perversion of the brit. A total abandonment of the oath brit time-oriented Av tohor Cohen identity—a shift from brit obligation into imperial legislation, from divine testimony into civic order. Greek syllogism, Muslim kalām, Secular science empiricism … this shit shaped into different hair styles.

      The Book of בראשית serves as the constitutional preamble of the Torah’s brit system. The six days utterly not a physical creation myth, but a spiritual time-ordering allegory. “Yehi Or” משל, the founding of time-conscious halachic being. Shabbat – not an endpoint but a weekly brit performance that re-enacts the national oath alliance obligation to rule the militarily conquered land of Canaan by means of the Torah Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach, the faith צדק צדק תרדוף.

      T’NaCH Kabbalah contains a real depth despite the Middle Ages kabbalah of mysticism. A performative ontology where time, sanctified by action, not explained by obscure religious rhetoric propaganda who only a mad-men like Sabbatai Zevi or Yacov Frank can “understand”.

      “This sh’itta of Torah scholarship, not merely theological. It seeks to inspire Jews to restore the Oath brit alliance… to forge a Torah Constitutional Republic with Sanhedrin Federal Courtrooms.” The Torah brit not a Code of Hammurabi. Halacha serves primarily as judicial precedents rather than religious codes of ritual practices.

      Statist halacha cast upon the dung heaps of history. The Will to reject Amalek – became seduced by the whore of assimilation and intermarriage. A new oath brit Manifesto radically different from the Marx Communist Manifesto first proclaimed during the 1848 Paris Commune revolution. The Jewish victory in two Independence Wars fought in ’48 and ’67 has changed the voice of g’lut Jews who had no fighting spirit to critique and confront Goyim cultures and barbaric civilizations. The establishment of the Jewish state based upon the foundation of Herzl’s Balfour Declaration and the League’s Palestine Mandate, has changed the new Israeli Man away from academic correction to revolutionary fire. European Xtianity now wears the boot of g’lut; they pine away waiting for the 2nd coming of their God.

      A new jurisprudence, a reassertion of Jewish sovereignty over time, law, and national soul, and a total rejection of those who have sold that Esau birthright for a plate of Greek syllogism and Spanish codification. Halacha not a code, but the oath alliance which continually creates the Chosen Cohen people יש מאין.

      The Torah aint no statute book of legislative decrees and laws. The mitzvot simply not limited to 613 egg crates sold by the dozen. Sinai totally not a legal Greek philosophy seminar. Torah the oath brit cut between the twelve tribes with HaShem, the Tribal God of prophetic mussar, where action sanctifies time, and time shapes the prophetic destiny of a chosen Cohen people.

      Torah not some imperial code (statute law), reduced to rational obligations and syllogisms. The Gemara content never divorced from its Mishna upon which it serves as a loyal commentary which never rebels and attempts to supplant its authority as equal to that of the Mishna. Oral Torah never divorced from its prophetic k’vanna. Tuma middot, they divorce/reduce Oral Torah limited to rational obligations and syllogisms. The logical study of precedents defines the intent of both Aggadic and Midrashic stories together with prophetic mussar as the defining k’vanna of Aggadic and Midrashic scholarship. Statute Caesar law does not replace Torah common law.

      From Sinai to Sanhedrin: The Republic Reborn — entails restoration of the 12 Tribes which define the Federal Repulbic. Sanhedrin as the Supreme common law judicial authority. Aggadah + Mishnah + Gemara = Living Common Law; Mitzvot = Time-oriented prophetic k’vanna, not abstract finite historical or physical limitations.

      LikeLike

      Reply
6. 

   mosckerr

   February 18, 2025 at 2:55 pm

   Was Mark’s Gospel an intentional tool of Roman psychological warfare, or was it a Jewish counter-narrative meant to influence how different Jewish communities engaged with Rome?

   Pie in the sky speculations attempt to foist as actual history propaganda stories of an imaginary Man-God & a zealous convert to Xtianity. Despite the clear language of the Torah that nothing in the Heavens, Earth, or Seas compares to the image of God or the prophet Bil’am’s explicit vision – God is not a Man.

   Coptic revisionist history does not change speculative books of propaganda into actual history. The earliest surviving manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark written in Greek. Papias’s claim that Mark, originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic simply never substantiated by any physical evidence. This discrepancy highlights the challenges in relying solely on early testimonies. Simply due to the fact that no known agenda defines the purpose of those early works!

   News travelled slowly in ancient times. Writing a detailed account like the Gospel of Mark would require more time than the immediate aftermath of the Temple’s destruction. The process of dating ancient texts often involves interpretations based on incomplete evidence. The News of the destruction of Herod’s Temple would by far have out shined the News of the Roman torture of a common criminal!

   The floated speculation made by Xtian scholars that the Mark gospel written between AD 65 – 75 has no physical evidence – anymore. This revisionist history of the life and death of a Harry Potter – imaginary Jesus. Furthermore, the Roman war to put down the Jewish revolt, like the destruction of Herod’s Temple in AD 66 would have swamped the News Headlines!

   Historians and scholars often work with incomplete evidence, leading to various theories and interpretations. The dating of ancient texts involves analyzing historical, literary, and contextual clues, which can result in differing scholarly opinions. Revisionist history perverts speculation and biased beliefs in God as the basis for truth! But this religious speculative interpretation, not the only kid on the playground.

   What evidence we have does suggest that Mark’s Gospel – written in Greek, and the claim that it was originally in Hebrew or Aramaic is one of those early testimonies (like Papias’s) that has not been substantiated by physical evidence. The lack of an original manuscript in Hebrew or Aramaic definitely complicates the matter. To point out the flimsy argument to its face.

   From a historical perspective, the fall of the Temple, a monumental event, and indeed. It would have garnered more attention from contemporary sources than the death of a single man—especially if that man was seen as a marginal figure at the time. A fine line between interpretation and assertion.

   History and religious narratives can sometimes become entangled with belief systems, and how that can distort our understanding of past events. History, at its core, should strive toward objective and evidence-based possibilities. The reliability of early Christian sources like Irenaeus (c. AD 180) and Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 200) depends on how one evaluates historical testimony. While some of the earliest known religious Goyim voices commenting on the origins of the Gospels, reliability – debated due to their biased views toward Xtianity. Traditional church dating of the gospels serves Xtian narratives. Irenaeus wrote around AD 180, more than a century after mythical Jesus’ time. Clement of Alexandria is even later, writing closer to AD 200.

   Both writers were engaged in theological battles, especially against Gnosticism. Some argue that their emphasis on apostolic authorship simply driven by the need to defend orthodoxy rather than strict historical accuracy. We do not have direct writings from Mark himself or from first-century figures confirming his authorship, only second-hand traditions which no courtroom would accept such hearsay evidence!

   Courts reject hearsay because the person who originally made the claim, unavailable for cross-examination. Ancient history, much of what we know comes from later accounts. If we dismissed all second-hand testimony, we’d lose most of ancient history, including figures like Socrates, whose teachings come from Plato and Xenophon. Mythology defines the ancient Greek writings.

   Challenging the idea that Mark’s Gospel was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic—and even questioning its authenticity altogether—comes from different camps within biblical scholarship. The Greek syntax and grammar do not suggest a translation from Semitic languages. Mark’s Gospel includes Latinisms (Roman loanwords), such as centurion (kenturion in Greek) and denarius, indicating it was written for a Greek-speaking Roman audience. The use of Aramaic phrases (e.g., Talitha koum in Mark 5:41) suggests that the author was translating occasional words rather than the entire text being a translation.

   Eusebius (4th century) quotes Papias, affirming that Mark wrote his Gospel based on Peter’s preaching, but he makes no reference to a Hebrew or Aramaic version which Papias (AD 110-140) claims. Some reasonable skeptics argue that Mark’s Gospel simply not based on historical events but rather a theological narrative invented by early Christians. They suggest Mark created a fictionalized Jesus, using Jewish scriptures (like Isaiah and the Psalms) as a template rather than actual historical events.

   Figures like Richard Carrier argue that Jesus, originally understood as a celestial being and that Mark later invented a biography for him, shaping the Gospel as an allegory rather than historical record. Many accept that Mark contains some historical elements but argue that miraculous accounts, predictive prophecy, and resurrection narratives, simple later embellishments made by Xtians who loved fairy tail stories.

   Paul as an Agent Provocateur: Instigating Civil War in Rome? Having lived in Rome he understood Roman weaknesses and political undercurrents. Like for example: Caesar worshipped himself as the son of God. Paul’s writings qualify also as political satire. Like Nigger Jim in Mark Finn who mocks King Solomon as the wisest of all men! The idea that the kingdom of God is not of this world fits precisely within Greek and Roman mythologies! Jewish religious authorities, specifically over the specific debate of an oven, where rabbi Eleazer got place into harem. Rabbi Eleazer called on a bat-kol, and the rabbis declared: the Torah does not come from heaven!

   Mark’s Roman written Gospel aimed to promote disharmony between the Jews of Alexandria Egypt and the Jews of Judea. During the Bar Kakhba revolt the Jews of Axelandria did not join that revolt. This permitted the Roman legions to destroy both revolts piecemeal.

   Chaos and anarchy defined the state of Judea during the first revolt against Rome. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls conclusively proves these historical facts. If Mark were inciting Jewish-on-Jewish conflict, it would align with historical accounts that factions within Jerusalem were already fighting among themselves before Rome even breached the city walls.

   Why does Mark’s gopels have Jesus say, “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s” (Mark 12:17)? This supports the premise that the gospel writings of Mark supported Jewish Civil War. The messiah narrative did emphatically split into strongly opposed Jewish factions! Jewish appeasers compare to post WWI British supporters of Chamberlain! Clearly the writings of Mark’s gospels opposed the war prone Zealots!

   Divide and Conquer an old idea. Roman interests as well as Jewish interested preferred fighting one another while their enemies fought a Civil War. The Maccabees conducted this strategy successfully against the Syrian Greeks 150 years previous.

   Roman emperors (especially Augustus) were deified as Divi Filius (Son of God). Paul’s reinterpretation of “Son of God” into a Jewish-messianic sense, could have been perceived by Rome as an indirect attack on Roman religious authority. If Paul mocked Caesar’s claim to divinity, it would qualify as political subversion—though disguised as religious teaching.

   The comparison of Paul to Mark Twain’s Jim in Huckleberry Finn, that his theology contained coded humor and irony meant to subvert authority. Some scholars note parallels between Greek/Roman mythology and Paul’s spiritual kingdom concept, suggesting he tailored his message to resonate with Roman audiences.

   Paul’s conflicts with Jewish religious leaders (especially over Torah authority) certainly widened the divide between Hellenistic Jews and traditional Pharisees. His message of a Torah-free Gospel was highly inflammatory—not only did it anger Judean Pharisees, but it also alienated Jewish nationalists who wanted a political Messiah. This played into Roman interests, whether Paul intended it or not.

   Mark’s Gospel exacerbated Jewish factionalism, particularly between Alexandrian Jews and Judean Jews. Did Alexandrian Jews Refuse to Join the Bar Kokhba Revolt Because of Mark’s Influence? There is no direct evidence linking Mark’s Gospel to Alexandrian Jewish neutrality, but the timing remains intriguing. Alexandrian Jews far more assimilated & Hellenized, and less likely to support a militant Jewish messianic movement. If Mark’s Gospel circulated among them, emphasizing a suffering, non-political Messiah, it could have dissuaded them from joining the rebellion.

   Josephus records that Jews in Jerusalem already experienced in killing each other before the Romans even arrived (Zealots vs. Priests vs. Sicarii). Mark’s Gospel portrays Jewish leaders as divided and corrupt, reinforcing Roman narratives that Jews were ungovernable. If Mark’s intention was to drive a wedge between Jewish factions, it would align with the Roman “divide and conquer” strategy.

   Mark 12:17 (“Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s”) suggests support for Roman rule and opposition to Zealot resistance. Jesus’ statement could be read as a message of appeasement. Encouraging Jews to cooperate with Rome, undermining Zealot ideology, and reinforcing the idea that the Messiah was not meant to be a political revolutionary.

   The Maccabees used this Divide-and-Conquer Strategy against the Greeks—turning different Hellenistic factions against each other. Rome, a master of this strategy, pitting Jewish factions against each other: Sadducees vs. Pharisees, Zealots vs. Hellenized Jews, Priests who denied the Oral Torah vs. rabbis who taught the Oral Torah. If Mark’s Gospel helped weaken Jewish unity, it ultimately benefited Rome.

   Paul’s personal motives remain unclear—was he a true believer, or a savvy political manipulator? Mark’s Gospel certainly reinforced factional divisions, whether by design or accident. The idea that Paul may have been an agent provocateur, knowingly exacerbating divisions within the Roman world to the benefit of Jerusalem, a compelling angle that aligns with historical Greek & Roman strategies of divide and conquer. Equally well known and embraced by Jewish Sanhedrin leadership which sent Paul to Rome to promote Roman Civil War prior to the outbreak of the great Jewish revolt.

   The connection between Mark’s Gospel and Jewish factionalism—especially its potential impact on Alexandrian Jews’ neutrality during the Bar Kokhba revolt—also quite interesting. If the Mark gospel, indeed written to undermine Jewish resistance by promoting a passive, non-political Messiah, it would fit neatly within the broader Roman strategy of controlling subject populations by weakening internal unity. The historical backdrop of intra-Jewish conflict before the fall of the Temple, as recorded by Josephus, provides further support for the idea that Mark’s Gospel likely designed (or at least functioned) as a tool of division rather than unity.

   If the Sanhedrin saw Rome’s internal divisions as a potential advantage—especially in the lead-up to the Jewish revolt—Paul’s role as an instigator could have been strategic. Given his Roman citizenship, education in Greek rhetoric, and ability to move between Jewish and Roman circles, he served as a well-positioned Sanhedrin asset, who introduced subversive ideas that could destabilize Roman unity.

   This would parallel other historical examples where Jewish leadership attempted to manipulate larger imperial powers to their advantage—much like the Hasmoneans did with Seleucid factions during their own revolt. If the Sanhedrin sent Paul to Rome as a spy, with the purpose: to promote theological and ideological rifts, it would explain why his teachings so totally disruptive—not just among Jews but within the Roman elite as well.

   Mark’s Gospel, then, could be seen as part of this broader game of influence, to pacify Jewish resistance (if pacifist pro-Roman) or to create ideological splits that kept Jews distracted among themselves (if existed a deeper Roman war-time strategy). The fact that Alexandrian Jews stayed out of the Bar Kokhba revolt, while Judean Jews fought Rome head-on, could suggest that differing religious narratives—possibly shaped by Mark—helped fragment Jewish unity.

   This interpretation pits the writings of Mark against those of Paul. Neither not as a merely religious thinkers, but as active political partisans, in the geopolitical struggle between Rome and Judea. If the Sanhedrin had the foresight to recognize Rome’s internal tensions and employed Paul as the tip of their spear, it would entirely redefine his original mission. A political kabbalah concealed from shallow Goyim who simply read his letters at face value. Rather than being a rogue preacher or a sincere evangelist, Paul served the Sanhedrin Court in Jerusalem as an early example of ideological subversion—using theology to create divisions within Roman society.

   This would mean his emphasis concerning a “kingdom not of this world”, a concealed way to undercut Roman religious authority, while his rejection of strict Torah observance like circumcision, could have been a means to fracture Jewish support for messianic Jesus nonsense. It also fits with his constant conflicts—both with Jewish traditionalists and with factions within early Christianity. His letters reveal a figure constantly navigating and exacerbating divisions, whether intentionally or as a by-product of his ideological agenda.

   Mark’s Gospel, also exposed as a second layer of Roman counter-disruption. If written in Rome, it could have express Roman strategic interests (to pacify Jewish resistance by promoting a passive Messiah) or to define Jewish messianism in a way that created discord between Hellenized Jews and their Judean counterparts. The simple fact stands: The church behaves as if it has a lock and key monopoly over the mitzva of Moshiach; despite the Pauline declaration that Goyim not under Jewish common law.

   The fact that Alexandrian Jews sat out the Bar Kokhba revolt while Judean Jews were crushed strongly suggests that competing messianic narratives—such as influenced by texts like Mark—which totally ignores the Torah Moshiach precedent of Moshe anointing Aaron with oil, which served as the basis of Shmuel who anointed both Shaul and David as Moshiach with oil. The gospel narratives all ignore the precedent of anointing all korbanot placed upon the altar with oil. It does not weigh the dedication through oil wherein the Moshiach sanctified to rule the oath brit chosen Cohen lands with righteous judicial justice as the faith of the Torah. Hence the gospel writers, not just Mark, instrumental in keeping Jewish factions divided. If true, this would mean early Christianity simply never just a mere religious movement, but part of a larger strategic game—a subversive ideological front in the struggle between Rome vs. Judea.

   Now if the letters of Paul and the gospel of Mark bogus? Then so too and how much more so the gospels of Matthew and Luke and the much later John likewise get flushed down the toilet.

   LikeLike

   Reply
7. 

   mosckerr

   February 11, 2025 at 10:06 am

   Why the Jews Reject the Christian and Muslim Worship of Avoda Zarah Gods.

   Translating abstract Hebrew concepts, such as שם ומלכות, into literal translations is highly problematic. Neither the Koran nor the New Testament ever once brings the שם השם revealed in the First Sinai commandment. This commandment instructs to perform the Torah commandments לשמה (for their own sake).

   The New Testament heavily relies upon the metaphor of “father” throughout the Gospel narratives. One reference in Deuteronomy 32:6: “Is this the way you repay the Lord, you foolish and unwise people? Is he not your Father, your Creator, who made you and formed you?”

   This strong mussar rebuke merits a common law search for a precedent within the language of the first four Books of the Written Torah. Paul’s critique: “You’re not under the Law” fails to discern between Torah common law/משנה תורה\ from Greek and Roman statute law legal formats.

   The Torah never refers to the First commandment revelation of the Spirit Name with any reference to the foreign name Allah. Hence Jews reject this foreign substitution to replace the revelation of the Torah at Sinai with Muhammad’s revelation of Allah in a cave.

   The Jewish people utterly amazed that Goyim have no concept of the distinction between tohor vs tumah spirits. This fundamental distinction required for the chosen Cohen people to do “avodat HaShem”; roughly interpreted as the service or worship of HaShem.

   The term מלכות refers to the spiritual direction of dedicating defined tohor spirits first revealed to Moshe after the Sin of the Gold Calf at Horev: ה’ ה’ אל רחום וחנון etc. The revelation of this “Oral Torah” the church fathers absolutely deny the existence of the revelation of the Oral Torah.

   The only other verse in the whole of the T’NaCH which employs 3 Divine Names in succession, kre’a Shma. Contrast the mitzva of saying kre’a shma with tefillen; with how Goyim scholars interpret Hear Israel the Lord God the Lord is One. The Talmud understands the 3 Divine Names, to the 3 oaths each separately sworn by the Avot.

   The term ONE, the last word of the kre’a shma, the person who accepts the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, he accepts the oaths separately sworn by Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov as ONE upon his heart.

   The purpose of tefillen: to swear a Torah oath. Goyim theologies never ask: what oaths did the Avot swear to cut a brit with HaShem concerning the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen seed of Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov. Islam in particular give a blow-job to the honor of the circumcised Avot. Christians see the Shema as a declaration of the oneness of God, which aligns with their belief in the Trinity—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—as one God in three persons. Muslim commentaries on the Shema recognize its importance in affirming the oneness of God, which is a central tenet of Islam.

   The Quran makes intertextual connections with the Shema, emphasizing that prayer and devotion to God are not about physical direction but about loving God with all one’s heart. This latter idea fails to address Rabbi Yechuda’s interpretation of לבבך as Yatzir Ha’Tov vs. Yatzir Ha’Rah.

   The concept of ‘resurrection from the dead’ shares nothing with life after death as both religions of avoda zarah preach. Rather the Yazir Ha’Tov breaths the spirits which did breath the spirits of the Avot! ONE, this concluding word of the Shma raises the Avot from the dead within the Yatzir Ha’Tov of each and every Jew in all generations, based upon the power to Create from nothing, by swearing a Torah oath!

   Hence when a Cohen didicated a korban upon the altar in Jerusalem, the portion of Israel in the korbonot avodat HaShem service, they read the Creation story in the beit knesset.

   Rabbi Akiva’s kabbalah known as פרדס defines how to logically understand how to employ the 13 tohor middot, as the critical means to make a precedent search comparison; the substance of Oral Torah common law scholarship upon the Written Torah. A quick examination of Deuteronomy 32:6 learns through the wisdom of Torah common law precedents.

   This mussar rebuke begins at 32:1 – 32:43. Mussar defines all prophecies, as codified by Moshe Rabbeinu and all other NaCH prophets. Goyim do not know this basic fundamental of Torah faith/pursuit of courtroom justice.

   Their Gospel forgery attempts to pervert tohor prophets to Av tumah witchcraft and sorcerers – who predict the future. This one Torah reference to “Father” merits a look at the previous verse for context. Both Trinity or strict monotheism qualifies as strange worship of foreign Gods.

   These alien Gods have no connection with the plagues in Egypt, the splitting of the Sea of Reeds, nor the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. They directly compare to the Av tumah Golden Calf.

   This revelation, that all Goyim to this day reject the Torah Sinai revelation. This prophetic mussar directly refers to the tuma worship of foreign alien Gods imported to Judaism by Av tuma Xtianity and Islam.

   This tremendous mussar rebuke, Deut. 32:1 – 32:43, compares to the vow which HaShem made to Moshe following the sin of the Golden Calf! Hence the rebuke of Moshe at the end of his life serves to amplify the prophetic mussar taught through the Aggadic story of Noach and the floods. Genesis 6:5 to 8:20: the exile of Noach in his Ark, story of Aggadic mussar – a depth analysis of prophetic mussar of Deut. 32:1 – 32:43.

   How could post Shoah Jewry defeat 5 Arab Armies and win our National Independence as a Nation after 2000+ years of oppressive exile? No Goyim courts of law ever once forced any church priest or pastor or any Sheik, to stand before the Bar and receive judgment for their evil war crimes committed repeatedly against the Jewish people and all Humanity in General.

   A simple precedent by which to grasp this prophetic mussar of g’lut. A fundamental Torah theme which the Apostle Paul’s “original sin” substitute theology totally uprooted in Goyim minds.

   The 1st Sinai commandment functions as the greatest commandment of the entire Torah. And it has no hint or reference to the Xtian Trinity Creed nor the Muslim Monotheism substitute theology Tawhid Creeds.

   The abstract term מלכות refers to the korban-like dedication of living blood thrown upon the altar; to the dedication of one or more of the 13 tohor middot Spirits revealed to Moshe at Horev, 40 days after the Sin of the Golden Calf, where a portion of Israel attempted to translate the Spirit Name of the 1st Sinai revelation into the word אלהים.

   Tefillah qualifies as the oath dedication of specific defined tohor middot as מלכות. The Order of the Shemone Esrei 3 + 13 + 3 Blessings. Contained within this Order the רמז of 613. Furthermore the order of this standing prayer holds a רמז to the 6 Yom Tov + Shabbat menorah!

   Herein understands the Torah concept of מלכות required to swear a Torah oath. The dedication of tohor middot directly compare to the Cohen throwing living blood upon the altar. Hence tefillah stands in the stead of korbanot!

   Why? Because both korbanot & tefillah both swear a Torah oath which dedicates tohor middot לשמה.

   The Torah openly states that nothing in the Heavens, Seas, or Earth compares to the revelation of the Spirit Name of HaShem. How much more so for imbecile word translations that attempt to convert the Divine Presence Spirit revelation of the Name into words that the lips of man can easily pronounce!

   The substitute religions of Av tuma avoda zarah attempt to foist belief in JeZeus or Allah as some “new covenant” Torah faith. These abominations fail to grasp that Torah defines faith as the righteous pursuit of judicial common law justice rather than belief in theological Gods which the mind of Man cannot possibly grasp nor understand.

   T’shuva does not correctly translate as repentance. T’shuva learns from HaShem annulling His vow to make the chosen Cohen nation from the seed of Moshe rather than the seed of Avraham, Yitzak, and Yaacov. Chag Yom Kippur commemorates this t’shuva made by HaShem. The Torah specifically employs the term t’shuva wherein HaShem annulled His vow to make the chosen Cohen nation from the seed of Moshe rabbeinu rather than from the oaths sworn to the Avot to this effect.

   When the Romans renamed Judea unto the “Palestine”, herein represents a historical example of t’shuva. The Romans sought to physically wipe out the existence and memory of the Jewish people, just as did Hitler’s Nazis!

   That the new testament and koran have no awareness of the oath brit faith, how tefillah differs from prayer because tefillah absolutely requires swearing a Torah oath as its time oriented commandment “k’vanna”; whereas prayer has nothing to do with swearing a Torah oath, nor with tohor time oriented commandments! These religious forgeries know nothing about the Torah faith which prioritized the obligation placed upon Torah Sanhedrin courts to pursue righteous compensation of damages inflicted by the guilty upon the innocent.

   This concept of annulling a vow derived from Torah common law precedent commandments concerning a father and his daughter or a husband and his wife, where both could annul the vow made by either a girl or a woman. The Roman attempt to expunge the memory of the Jewish state of Judea likewise serves as an example of the intent of annulling a vow. As does UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/19, adopted on December 21, 2017. This resolution declared the status of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital as “null and void” and called on all states to refrain from establishing diplomatic missions in Jerusalem.

   The Xtian and Muslim concepts – concerning worship of their Gods – fundamentally contradict the 2nd Sinai commandment. T’NaCH and Talmudic traditions define the k’vanna of the 2nd Sinai commandment through the Torah precedents which forbid pursuing the ways of the Goyim which reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and Horev; and the specific commandment not to intermarry foreign wives. King Shlomo worshipped avoda zarah; when he copied the Goyim practices of building grand Temples and married foreign wives.

   The mitzva of building the Beit HaMikdash centers upon establishment of Sanhedrin Common law courts across the land, rather than bankrupting the country build some grand palatial cathedral. Hence the Sages placed the Great Sanhedrin within the Temple itself; they made a tiqqun on king Shlomo’s assimilated avoda zara! Jews do not worship wood and stone idols, how much more so ornate extravagant buildings! The oppressive slavery where Par’o withheld straw, yet beat Israeli slaves, upon this basic Torah precedent – stands Torah faith to pursue judicial justice.

   Neither Xtianity nor Islam ever attempted to return the Jewish people to our homeland as, by stark contrast, did the great king of Persia. The Persian king Cyrus, referred to as a “messiah” or “anointed one.” This reference found in Isaiah 45:1, which states: “Thus says the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped, to subdue nations before him and strip kings of their robes, to open doors before him— and the gates shall not be closed.” In this context, the term “anointed” (מָשִׁיחַ, mashiach), used to describe Cyrus, indicating that he was chosen by God to achieve a specific purpose, namely, to facilitate the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem. The Torah mitzva of Moshiach: anoints a Jewish king to police the land, working in close conjunction with judicial common law Sanhedrin lateral courts of justice.

   The Persian king learned from the successful conquest of the Assyrian empire by the Babylonians. The Assyrian barbarians uprooted entire populations of conquered nations and replaced those refugee populations with foreign aliens who had no connection to that land. This reality permitted the Babylonian Armies to conquer the Assyrian empire much like water goes through a sieve.

   Roman new testament propaganda stands in stark contrast with the great king of Persia. The Romans sought to ignite social anarchy and Civil War among the Jewish people. In this effort they succeeded as well as they did destroying Herod assimilated Temple abomination. The British government duplicated the policies of the hated Romans. During its Palestine mandate period, London foisted a divide and rule policy between Arabs and Jews.

   Both the Syrian Greeks and the Romans based their society social order upon the ideas of ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle and others. Aristotle served as a key advisor to Alexander the Great. Aristotle’s 3 part syllogism does not compare to rabbi Akiva’s 4 part פרדס logic system. All logic requires order: the letter order which distinguishes “God vs Dog”, radically changes how a person perceives the idea communicated! In equal manner Order defines the Jewish Prayer Book known as the Siddur. The Siddur contains the root word סדר – Order.

   Why do Jews view Xtianity and Islam as Av Tuma avoda zarah? Goyim never accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. JeZeus did not observe the mitzva of shabbat. This mitzva requires that Jews make the הבדלה/distinction that discerns like from like; מלאכה from עבודה. Failure to understand the subtle distinction which separates these two verbs, both of which translate as “work”; an Am Ha’aretz never keeps the mitzva of shabbat observance – ever in his or her life.

   Mesechta Shabbat learns מלאכה whereas mesechta Baba Kama learns עבודה. The question do the toldot follow the Avot asked by both mesechtot; this question based upon the Av time oriented commandments in בראשית, compared to the toldot positive and negative commandments in the Books שמות, ויקרא, ובמדבר. Torah scholarship always strives to make the essential understanding which makes the מאי נפקא מינא הבדלה between like from like “understandings”. The Talmud defines this attribute as the interpretation of the tohor midda of רב חסד. Baba Kama distinguishes between tam and muad damagers. The latter applies to Man because it requires intent, as do all time oriented Av commandments. Four Avot Muad damagers: Oppression, theft, ערוה, and judicial bribery, learned by means of a דיוק logical inference made upon the four tam damagers explicitly stated in the Av Mishna of Baba Kama.

   Shabbat observance dedicates not doing forbidden מלאכה on the day of shabbat; דיוק, likewise to not do forbidden עבודה during the 6 days of the ‘week of shabbat’. The Goyim religions of Av tuma avoda zarah never grasped this fundamental distinction of shabbat observance as a mitzva inclusive of every day of the week. Proof that the polecat “daughter religions” never learned the Torah לשמה.

   Both Xtianity and Islam superficially claim to respect shabbat, but their religious rhetoric, as empty as Arabs eating camel flesh but abhorring pork! These religions of avoda zarah have no awareness of the chosen Cohen people and the Divine oath inheritance to the oath sworn brit lands, or the spiritual awareness which discerns between tohor vs. tumah spirits which breath within the Yatzir Ha’Tov vs. the Yatzir Ha’Rah within the bnai brit hearts.

   Repentance, a totally empty Xtian idea of personal regret; it shares no common ground with t’shuva, that bases itself upon annulling vows. Neither the father nor the husband “regrets” annulling a vow made by his daughter or wife. Therefore, t’shuva shares no common ground with the Xtian void concept of repentance.

   Similarly, the translation of “covenant” shares no common ground with the Hebrew concept ברית. The latter – an oath alliance sworn לשמה. To swear an oath alliance requires שם ומלכות. The new testament and koran forgeries never bring the שם השם as revealed in the first Sinai commandment. Therefore, both books of Av tuma foreign religions – worship other gods; both Av tuma religions profane the 2nd Sinai commandment. Both know nothing that a Torah brit requires swearing a Torah oath לשמה, with the intent to cut an eternal alliance touching the chosen Cohen people.

   All T’NaCH prophets command mussar strictly to the chosen Cohen people. Herein defines the intent or k’vanna of all T’NaCH prophecy. The new testament Roman forgery does not comprehend these subtle distinctions. It together with Islam believes in some type of Universal God. The Xtian forgery seeks to promote civil war within Jewish society, by perverting prophecy into an Av tuma witchcraft, which makes predictions concerning the future. Throughout the gospel narrative this type of silly narishkeit spews from the new testament like farts.

   Chaos and anarchy defined the Jewish revolt attempt(s) against the Romans. Multiple and many Jewish sects dominated the 66 rebellion. Bar Kokhba’s revolt failed to unite Jews of Judea with a well-timed & coordinated Jewish revolt together and united with the Jews of Alexandria Egypt. Furthermore, that general failed to drive the Roman legions out of Damascus, Syria, a critical error.

   Bar Kokhba’s critical errors of judgment doomed this second Jewish revolt at Betar. Jewish social anarchy and civil war greatly contributed to the Roman victory over the Jewish revolts in both 66 and 135. The key concept of Torah faith revolves around the righteous pursuit of judicial justice within the borders of the oath-sworn brit lands – the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen nation, Bar Kokhba as a military messiah failed to achieve.

   The Av tuma avoda zara religions, worship other gods; they pervert the Torah vision of faith – forcibly converted into some theological creed-based personal belief system. These substitute theologies attempts to subvert the Torah faith that spins around the central axis: the righteous pursuit of judicial justice obligations; which makes a fair compensation of damages inflicted by party A upon party B. Av tuma avoda zara religions seek to substitute the pursuit of righteous justice with a personal belief in JeZeus or Allah.

   Av tuma Avoda zara substitute theologies attempt to supplant their creed based personal belief in theologically defined belief systems, that define their gods as either a 3-part One God mystery or a simple One God monotheism. Despite the simple fact that monotheism violates the 2nd Sinai commandment. Because if only one God then no need to command not to worship other Gods. Moshe travelled to Egypt, and the 10 plagues judged the gods of Egypt. Just as did HaShem judge the Gods worshipped by the Canaanite kings. Avoda zara plagues all generations of Israel; all generations struggle with assimilation and intermarriage.

   The sworn oath brit cut at GilGal, as expressed through the Rashi tefillen recalls the fact that Goyim worship other Gods. No such reality as a Universal God. The lights of Hanukkah, for example, reject Greek philosophy. Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס four basis logic system radically differs from Aristotle’s 3 part syllogisms. Attempts made by assimilated rabbis to interpret the T’NaCH and Talmud based upon Greek logic formats – an utter abomination on the order of Xtianity and Islam.

   Greek philosophy qualifies as a foreign substitute theology; an Av tuma on par with the Christian and Muslim avoda zara repeated attempts to convert Jews with their replacement theologies. Hence Jews who study ancient Greek philosophy, they err in Av tuma avoda zara as much as do Jews who convert to Xtianity and Islam; as much as did Moshiach Bar Kachba failure to coordinate the revolt together with the Jews of Alexandria Egypt and to carry the war into Syria with the objective of conquering both Damascus together with all its major naval ports.

   The Jewish concept of Moshiach a פרט to the כלל function of the Torah and the Oral Torah in interpreting key aspects of Jewish common law and prophecy; Moshiach: an Oral Torah commandment. Indeed, the Jewish approach to the concept of the Messiah, as found in both the T’NaCH and the Oral Torah Talmud codification, quite different & distinct from how the gospel counterfeit portrays Jesus within Christian theology. The following discussion reflects the different views on this matter, particularly in relation to how Jewish scholars might interpret the failure of the Gospel narrative to align with both the Torah’s precedence based common law legalism, and the traditional understanding of the Moshiach as understood through T’NaCH prophetic mussar.

   The Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach, deeply rooted in how the Oral Torah interprets the k’vanna of the Written Torah; just as the time oriented commandment of tefillah requires שם ומלכות as its oath k’vanna. Particularly through the common law precedents set by Moshe’s anointing of the House of Aaron, as well as the later anointing of King Shaul by the prophet Shmuel.

   The notion that the Moshiach must come from the lineage of David, himself a descendant of Judah, a latter tiqqun added to the mitzva of Moshiach. This latter tiqqun sought to ensure that the line of the House of David, completely rejects the Xtian theological “Father God” of JeZeus mythology. This latter revisionist history attempt directly compares to the mythology of how Zeus fathered Hercules! Adultery an Av tumah Capital Crime. JeZeus the offspring of Zeus as the father of the Gods, represents a Torah abomination.

   The Talmud’s emphasis on the Torah sage being held in greater regard than a king of Israel, a critical piece Talmudic understanding concerning the priority of spiritual leadership. The Torah Talmid Chacham, perceived by the sages of the Talmud as the one who understands and interprets the Torah common law; possessing the wisdom to guide the nation in matters of our destiny path of truth-faith, which commits the chosen Cohen people to pursue righteous judicial justice. The role of the Moshiach in Oral Torah logic, not just a political or religious leader. Nor some military figure comparable to Bar Kachba; rather, Moshiach represents the Oral Torah interpretation of someone who restores the Torah as the Written Constitution of the Republic; the Oral Torah as the basic model of lateral common law courtrooms. As such, the Moshiach’s anointing, deeply tied to the oath brit relationship established by Avram at the brit cut between the pieces and the tradition Oral Torah learning.

   Just as “swearing” an oath blessing requires שם ומלכות, so too the Order established by the Framers of the Talmud affixed a warp/weft loom like relationship between the Aggada narratives opposed by the Halachic portions of the Gemara common law precedent based commentary to the Mishna. Stripping a garment of either its warp or weft threads destroys the fabric of that garment. The statute law halachic codifications of the Middle Ages made this precise abomination. To correct the Rambam halachic perversion requires affixing any and all Rambam posok halacha in his statute law perversion to the identical halacha within the B’HaG, Rif, or Rosh common law halachic codifications. These kosher halachic common law codes always affix their Halachic Gemara rulings to a Primary Source Mishna.

   Torah scholarship requires a sharp critical eye which can discern Like from Like. The Talmud refers to this skill as the definition of understanding. Just as swearing a oath blessing requires the warp/weft of שם ומלכות, so too and how much more so ritual halachic observance requires its Aggadic דרוש\פשט learning to T’NaCH Primary sources which makes a common law precedent comparison search that explores the depths or facets of prophetic mussar which defines the פשט of the Talmudic aggada warp. Oral Torah: just as the Gemara makes a multiply faceted משנה תורה\legislative review (re-interpretation) of the diamond like faces of Mishnaic language, so too and how much more so precedent based research gleans prophetic mussar tohor middot comparisons from sugyot of NaCH compared to the identical sets of tohor middot located in other sugyot of NaCH. This depth analysis of prophetic mussar determines the k’vanna of Torah mitzvot and Talmudic halachot observances.

   The concept of anointing with oil in the context of sacrifices (korbanot) in the Temple, also fundamental to understanding the Jewish approach to Moshiach. This oil, used in the service of the Temple, symbolized the sanctification of Israel’s offerings and the anointing of its leaders. The Messiah, in Jewish thought, will be anointed in a similar manner to those figures who came before him—especially the kings and priests of Israel, in accordance with the Torah’s stipulations. A concrete act of divine selection and empowerment.

   The Xstian claim that JeZeus fulfills the role of Moshiach simply at odds with the traditional Jewish understanding of the term. From the Jewish perspective, Jesus’ life and actions do not align with the Oral Torah’s requirements for Moshiach. The Gospels narrative fail to engage with the Oral Torah’s teachings about the Moshiach, and they do not acknowledge the precedent established in common law, the anointing of the House of Aaron or the priests and kings of Israel. In Jewish tradition, the Moshiach must be a descendant of King David (through his father, not his mother), a precondition which the so called ‘virgin birth’ failed to achieve. Furthermore, the bogus Xtian narrative specifically failed to “fulfill” the specific roles, re-establishment of the Federal Sanhedrin common law system of Torts and Capital Sanhedrin courtrooms which achieved judicial justice in the oath sworn lands of the chosen Cohen nation. None of these pre-conditions did JeZeus accomplish in any the historical context.

   The failure of the Gospel narrative to align with the Torah’s precedent for the anointing of the Moshiach another of the many points of contention. In Jewish tradition, anointing with oil – an essential part of the mitzva of Moshiach. As exemplified in the Torah’s precedents of Moshe & Aaron, and of course kings Shaul & David. JeZeus never depicted as being anointed, except by a prostitute. Such a narrative compares to the judicial injustice and brutal torture which the gospel narrative portrays the JeZeus “sacrifice” upon the Roman altar of death. For Jewish scholars, this vile depiction makes only a fictional story. The gospel narrative does satisfy the Torah’s vision of Moshiach, which requires restoration of the Torah Constitutional Republic and the Sanhedrin lateral common law Federal court system. A prostitute anointing the feet of a man hardly qualifies as holy korban.

   The Talmudic teachings on the Moshiach, make clear that the Messiah not only restores the Torah as the constitution of the Republic, but just as significant, the Moshiach re-establish Torah Sanhedrin lateral common law courts. The gospel narrative of a spiritual Moshiach, while not entirely foreign to Judaism, based upon the false messiah movements lead by Sabbatai Zevi and Yaacov Frank; based upon these latter false messiah examples the gospel fictional narrative hardly stands as authentic. Talmudic common law rejects such ‘spiritual messiahs as utterly false.

   The Oral Torah\Talmud give a specific definition of a prophet as someone who guides the people of Israel toward t’shuva and adherence to the mitzvot (commandments) expressed through Av tohor time oriented commandments. Prophets, employ the 13 tohor middot as the basis of T’NaCH mussar common law sugya comparisons to other T’NaCH sugyot. Prophetic mussar, functions as the warp/weft loom like opposing threads of Talmudic halacha. T’NaCH prophetic mussar, based on a comparison of similar middot configurations within NaCH sugyot, defines the wisdom of learn the NaCH kabbalah לשמה. Time oriented commandments require prophetic mussar as the basis of k’vanna within the heart.

   The concept of prophecy in Judaism, not about foretelling the future, a trait known to tuma false prophets, who according to the gospel narrative “fulfil” the words of the prophets. Utterly absurd. Time oriented Av Torah commandments, which require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna of tohor Oral Torah middot, apply equally to all generations of the chosen Cohen people. The gospel narative did not grasp the essence of Torah observance of Av tohor time oriented commandments. Time oriented commandments require prophetic mussar for the generations to observe this unique type of Av commandments לשמה. The idea that JeZeus fulfilled the words of the prophets as absurd as a prostitute pouring oil onto his feet transforms this work of fiction into both Moshiach and the son of God.

   The Xtian tradition, judged upon the scales of Oral Torah Av time oriented commandments, clear as the Sun on a cloudless day a false messiah depiction on the order of Harry Potter fiction. Allah Voldemort – dead. JeZeus particularly not only specifically ignorant of the mitzva of Shabbat & the כלל of Av time oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar which define the k’vanna of Oral Torah middot. JeZeus, as a specific example taught “prayer” as “Our father who lives in Heaven” rather that tefillah a matter of the heart. Prophetic mussar k’vanna – a matter of the heart. Tefillah entails swearing a Torah oath לשמה to dedicate a specific defined tohor midda in order to make a tiqqun how a man interacts in the future with his wife, children, family, neighbours and people. The k’vanna of tefillah dedicates tohor defined prophetic mussar middot לשמה.

   Xtian theology places JeZeus in a perverse position where the gospel narrative declares that he “fulfilled the Law”, oblivious that the gospels have not the least bit of a clue what Torah common law means nor how it functions. JeZeus’s departure from Torah common law, particularly in matters like Shabbat observance, cited as but one obvious example of how this imaginary man cannot and does not ‘fulfil’ the prophets.

   The Jewish rejection of Jesus as Moshiach, or even as the koran narrative as a Torah prophet rests squarely upon the failure of the gospels to address Av tohor time oriented commandments. Besides the failure to align with the Torah’s specific precondition which learns the mitzva of Moshiach from korbanot anointed with oil together with the restoration of the Sanhedrin lateral common law court Federal court system. The Roman fraud gospel framers did not understand Constitutional Torah law.

   This fundamental blatant error concerning the nature of prophetic mussar as the definition through precedent comparison which define the k’vanna of tohor middot, as the definition and purpose the Oral Torah Horev revelation. Implications of strange Xtian doctrines, such as salvation through grace, or Jesus’ fulfilment of the Law, judged as Av tuma avoda zarah; the forerunner of Sabbatai Zevi’s antinomian doctrine. The absolute ignorance of the gospel narrative to Av tohor time oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna within the heart definitively proves that JeZeus failed the “one in 10,000” may attain the level of Torah scholarship and prophetic merit.

   The Gospel narratives simply understood as a perversion of T’NaCH and Talmudic Moshiach mussar prophecies. Xtian theology and creeds ignores the foundational principles of achieving Av time oriented commandments, wherein the bnai brit Cohen people breath the tohor spirits of the Creator of the Universe from within the Yatzir Tov of our hearts; the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev.

   Muslim theologians approach the issue of JeZeus and Muhammad being referred to as Old Testament prophets, based upon the false assumption that the gospel narrative merit respect. Latter day Islam which declares the Torah as corrupt compares to the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith. Many Xtian theologians draw a line of comparison between Muhammad and Smith. Both “prophets” introduced their own new order of scriptures.

   Both Islam and Mormonism highly revers the treif gospel narratives. Goyim have a deep infatuation with T’NaCH prophets, despite their total ignorance of tohor middot and Av time oriented commandments. Muhammad’s message of monotheism, likewise declares that JeZeus predicted the coming of Muhammad. JeZeus in the Quran has absolutely no concept of the mitzva of Moshiach as interpreted by the Oral Torah פרדס logic system and tohor middot.

   The koran regards Muhammad as the Seal of the Prophets (Khatam an-Nabiyyin), despite not having the least bit of a clue how the T’NaCH understands the function and role of prophets. Clearly Islamic thought resembles the prophet Adam Smith far more than any T’NaCH prophet. The koran does not position Muhammad as a continuation of the Jewish prophetic line in a direct, historical sense. Muhammad according to the koran narrative lived as the final prophet who brought the ultimate revelation from God. Both the koran and Mormon holy books supersede all the scriptures which preceded them.

   Neither the gospels, koran nor book of Mormon brings the שם השם revealed in the first Sinai commandment. These latter day Goyim “prophets” confuse the Hebrew “oath alliance”/ברית as one in the same with the sophomoric translated term covenant. Lacking the שם השם no man can cut a Torah ברית. Hence, covenant cannot mean brit. A difference of apples and oranges. Which these Goyim prophets remained completely oblivious in their bliss & ignorance. In many ways these spiritual reformers compare to Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli, John Calvin, William Tyndale, John Knox, John Wesley, and Mary Baker Eddy. While not all these individuals directly hated or despised one another, certainly significant theological disagreements and conflicts erupted among them.

   Luther believed in the doctrine of consubstantiation. Zwingli, on the other hand, viewed the Eucharist as purely symbolic. John Calvin’s theology was influenced by both Luther and Zwingli, but he developed his own distinct doctrines, particularly on predestination and the sovereignty of God.

   William Tyndale focused on translating the Bible into English, and his fugitive status continually forced him to hide from English authorities. John Wesley, came much later and had different theological focuses. He disagreed with Calvin’s predestination doctrine, emphasizing free will and personal holiness. Wesley’s Arminian views such as: Free Will, Prevenient Grace that precedes and prepares the soul for salvation; Conditional Election upon faith, Universal Atonement: that salvation is available to everyone, but only those who accept it will be saved. These “prophesies” put him at odds with Calvinist traditions.

   Mary Baker Eddy, her teachings were often seen as unorthodox or heretical by mainstream Xtian denominations. The debates and tensions among them highlight the diversity and complexity of the Reformation and subsequent religious movements. Comparatively speaking, Muhammad fits right into the crowd of these religious reformers and prophets.

   Bottom line: Justice: fair judicial compensation for damages inflicted. Not forgiveness for sin. The Pauline substitute theology of original sin perverted the key Torah theme of g’lut\exile. Starting with the exile of Adam from the garden, Noach’s exile in the Ark, and the exile of Israel in Egypt. And concluding with the 40 year exile in the Wilderness. The Holy Writings Book of Job likewise teaches the mussar of g’lut/exile.

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply
   1. 

      noga noga

      February 12, 2025 at 9:39 am

      😊🙌💕✨🌺🌻🌹🌷

      LikeLiked by 1 person

      Reply
8. 

   Enikanonaye Temitope

   January 16, 2025 at 11:16 am

   The great and believed prophet, Ibrahim, may the peace and blessing of Almighty God be upon him and his generation, the noble one.

   LikeLiked by 2 people

   Reply
   1. 

      noga noga

      January 17, 2025 at 1:31 am

      Peace be upon him, and may God bless our master Muhammad. Thank you very much. Enikanonaye. I wish you good luck, happiness, and success.

      LikeLiked by 3 people

      Reply
      1. 

         Enikanonaye Temitope

         January 17, 2025 at 10:37 pm

         (s a w). Amen, thanks.

         LikeLiked by 1 person

         Reply
9. 

   justrojie

   January 15, 2025 at 10:44 am

   Ooh I did not know his grave was there 😮

   LikeLiked by 2 people

   Reply
   1. 

      noga noga

      January 16, 2025 at 2:08 am

      Thank you very much. I wish you a happy life

      LikeLiked by 3 people

      Reply
10. 

    Johnbritto Kurusumuthu

    January 15, 2025 at 7:09 am

    The depth and detail in your narration are incredible! You’ve not only told a story but also brought Abraham’s legacy to life. This is the kind of writing that educates and uplifts readers.👌🎉

    LikeLiked by 2 people

    Reply
    1. 

       noga noga

       January 15, 2025 at 9:33 am

       Varlığınız için çok teşekkür ederim, iyi günler ve iyi şanslar sevgili johnbritto.

       LikeLiked by 3 people

       Reply
       1. 

          Johnbritto Kurusumuthu

          January 15, 2025 at 9:35 am

          👏🤝🌷

          LikeLiked by 2 people

          Reply
11. 

    Lamittan Felix

    January 15, 2025 at 6:51 am

    This is so enlightening and helpful, my friend. I now clearly understand why Lot and Abraham parted ways. Many thanks for sharing this with us. 🙏

    LikeLiked by 2 people

    Reply
    1. 

       noga noga

       January 15, 2025 at 9:42 am

       Thank you very much, Lamitan. I wish you happiness and success. I was pleased with your comment. Good luck

       LikeLiked by 3 people

       Reply
       1. 

          Lamittan Felix

          January 15, 2025 at 4:26 pm

          Glad you are. Feel most welcome, my friend 🪷🌺

          LikeLiked by 2 people

          Reply
          1. 

             noga noga

             January 16, 2025 at 3:10 am

             👋🏻🙋🏻‍♀️🌹

             LikeLiked by 3 people

             Reply
12. 

    macalder02

    January 15, 2025 at 6:24 am

    A very interesting biblical story about Abraham. Hello Noga. Have a happy Wednesday.

    LikeLiked by 2 people

    Reply
    1. 

       noga noga

       January 15, 2025 at 9:36 am

       Thank you very much. I was pleased with your comment. I wish you happiness and success always

       LikeLiked by 2 people

       Reply
       1. 

          macalder02

          January 15, 2025 at 10:48 am

          You are welcome dejar Noga.

          LikeLiked by 2 people

          Reply
13. 

    balladeer

    January 15, 2025 at 6:04 am

    Thank you for another educational blog post! Have a great rest of the week!

    LikeLiked by 2 people

    Reply
    1. 

       noga noga

       January 15, 2025 at 9:38 am

       Likewise, dear Edward, my best wishes and prayers for you

       LikeLiked by 4 people

       Reply